Sustainable Renewable Energy Planning in the Alps

A handbook for experts & decision makers Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 2 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Impressum Publisher: recharge.green project

Editorial responsibility: SVADLENAK-GOMEZ, Karin1; TRAMBEREND, Peter6; WALZER, Chris1

Copy editing: READ, Brigitte6; LAMB, Ulrike6

Authors: BALEST, Jessica8; BERCHTOLD-DOMIG, Markus21; BERTIN, Simone15; CIOLLI, Marco16; GAREGNANI, Giulia8; GEITNER, Clemens7; GERI, Francesco16; GRILLI, Gianluca8; GROS, Julie8; HAIMERL, Gerhard4; HASTIK, Richard7; KRALJ, Tomaž2; KRAXNER, Florian10; KUENZER, Nina20; LEDUC, Sylvain10; MIOTELLO, Francesca15; PALETTO, Alessandro17; PETRINJAK, Alenka14; PISKE, Rok13; POLJANEC, Aleš5; PORTACCIO, Alessia18; SACCHELLI, Sandro19; SERRANO LEON, Hernan10; SIMONČIČ, Tina5; SVADLENAK-GOMEZ, Karin1; VETTORATO, Daniele8; VRŠČAJ, Borut2; ZAMBELLI, Pietro8; ZANGRANDO, Erica15; WALZER, Chris1

With contributions from: AJMONE MARSAN, Franco (University of Turin); GIRAUDO, Luca (Natural Park of Maritime Alps); GOMEZ-ECHEVERRI, Luis (Sustainable Energy for All - SE4ALL); NORDSTRÖM, Eva-Maria (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences - SLU); PETTENELLA, Davide (University of Padova); REITERER, Markus (Alpine Convention); RÜF, Franz (Regional Development of Vorarlberg); ZAFRAN, Janez (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food); ZEN, Sergio (Regione del Veneto) Layout: SiDizajn

Photo credits: Photo front-page, Richard Bartz Munich, Makro Freak Project partners: 1 - Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology (FIWI) of the University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, lead partner; 2 - Agricultural Institute of Slovenia (AIS); 3 - Agroscope – Swiss research into agriculture, nutrition and the environment; 4 - Bavarian electric power company (BEW); 5 - Department for forestry and renewable forest resources, University of Ljubljana; 6 - Environment Agency Austria; 7 - Institute for Geography, University of Innsbruck; 8 - European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano (EURAC); 9 - International Commission for the Protection of the Alps (CIPRA); 11 - International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA); 12 - Regional Development Vorarlberg; 13 - Slovenia Forest Service; 14 - Triglav National Park; 15 - Veneto Region - Office for Economics and the Development of Mountain Areas; 22 - Institut de la Montagne of the Université de Savoie

Project observers: Alpine Town of the Year Association, Austrian Institute of Economic Research, ARPAV/Veneto Regional Agency for Prevention and Environmental Protection, Austrian Biomass Association, Canton St. Gallen/Office for Environment and Energy, Consorzio Bim Piave, Eawag/Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Institute for Ecological Energy at the Bavarian Environment Agency, Office of the Lower Austrian Government/Department of Rural Development, Permanent Secretariat of the Alpine Convention, Platform Ecological Network of the Alpine Convention, Province of Bolzano, Regional Governmental Office of the Land Salzburg/Department of Spatial Planning, Regional Governmental Office of the Land Vorarlberg, Veneto Region

Other Contributors: 16 - Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanical Engineering (DICAM-UNITN) University of Trento (Italy); 17 - Council for Agricultural Research and Economics (CREA), Forest Monitoring and Planning Research Unit (Italy); 18 - University of Padova; 19 - University of Florence; 20 - blue! advancing european projects GbR, 21 - Heimaten

September 2015 Download: http://www.recharge-green.eu/ ISBN: 978-3-200-04346-6 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 3 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Table of Contents

Executive summary 5 1 Balancing Alpine energy and nature – the project recharge.green 7 Interview: A view from outside the Alps 8

2 Social science and ecosystem services 13 Interview: The importance of valuation of ecosystem services 14

2.1 Introduction of the ecosystem services approach 15 Science: Total Economic Value of ecosystem services 17

2.2 Participatory processes and social impact assessment 18 Science: Social Impact Assessment 20 Science: Challenges of the participatory approach 23 Best practice example: Stakeholder involvement in the Maè valley pilot region 25

2.3 Ecosystem services and soil functions 26

3 Decision support systems 29 Interview: The role of social science and decision support systems 30

3.1 Short general introduction to decision support systems 31 3.2 Introduction to strategic environmental assessment 33 Science: The use of GIS as a tool for Strategic Environmental Assessment 35

3.3 An Alpine wide DSS model for optimal plant location decisions 37 Science: The BeWhere model 40

3.4 An Alps-wide spatially explicit DSS for assessment and planning 41 of renewable energy potential 3.5 The DSS biomass-energy-biodiversity-landscape management system (BEBL) 45 in Triglav National Park 3.6 The spatially explicit DSS “WISDOM” model in Triglav National Park 49 3.7 A visual DSS approach that captures complexity – the Sample Hectare method 51 in Leiblach, Vorarlberg 3.8 The benefits and drawbacks of DSS 55 3.9 Some notes on data requirements 57 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 4

Table of Contents

4 Ecosystem services and biodiversity scenarios 60 Interview: Renewable energy development in Vorarlberg 61

4.1 Renewable energy impacts on provisioning services 62 4.2 Impacts on regulating and maintenance services 63 4.3 Impacts on cultural services 65 Interview: The importance of considering soils when valuing ecosystem services 66

4.4 Scenario discussion 67

5 Renewable energy exploitation and ecosystem 70 services: Alpine region and pilot area analysis 5.1 The recharge.green approach: results and best practices 71 Interview: Alpine Convention: towards “Renewable Alps” 77

5.2 The decision support system and the participatory approach in the 78 Mis and Maé valleys Interview: What makes a DSS useful for public administrations? 84

5.3 Trade-off between energy exploitation and ecosystem services in 85 Gesso and Vermenagna valleys 5.4 Strategic environmental assessment in the bioenergy sector: 90 the natural capital concept and the environmental impacts Interview: Ecosystem services in the Gesso and Vermenagna valleys 97 Science: Mapping ecosystem services 98

5.5 Forest biomass use and biodiversity in Triglav National Park 99 5.6 A best practice example from Slovenia that considers ecosystem services 108 Interview: A good forest management plan is the foundation for 109 balancing energy use and nature

5.7 A best practice example from Bavaria that benefits fish populations 110 Science: The Water Framework Directive 112

5.8 The potential for developing renewable energy in Leiblachtal, Vorarlberg 113 Best: Free and open source software in research projects 118 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 5 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Executive summary

The Alps, with their long cultural history factors. But how can decision-makers and unique geographic and geological make better land-use planning deci- particularities, are a biodiversity hot- sions? spot. This extraordinary biodiversity, and the ecosystem services resulting The recharge.green project concerned from it, is being threatened by various itself with evaluating both the poten- anthropogenic pressures, including tials and the trade-offs involved in ex- climate change. Climate change miti- panding renewable energy production gation measures such as the increased in the Alps. 16 partners from 6 Alpine use of renewable energy can have both countries, including members of na- positive and negative effects on the tional parks, local government, aca- Alpine region. Siting decisions for new demia, civil society, and the private sec- renewable energy production facilities, tor, have jointly developed a set of tools whether hydropower, biomass, wind, to facilitate decision-making on renew- or solar power, have to be carefully able energy extraction in the Alps. The evaluated, taking into account not only tools can help to evaluate the ´renewa- technical and economic potential, but ble energy carrying capacity’ of the bio- also ecological sustainability and social diversity-rich Alpine ecosystems.

Chapter 1 provided by Alpine ecosystems. Soil eco- provides a brief overview of historic and cur- system services are highlighted as an ex- rent developments in the Alps and presents ample of the complexity of ecosystems and a summary of the recharge.green project. It the impacts renewable energy may have on outlines the economic and political dimen- them. The chapter discusses the potential sions of land-use decisions and introduces conflicts that may develop between nature established methodologies for calculating conservation and ecosystem services, and the social costs of public investments. It among different types of ecosystem servic- briefly introduces the concept of ecosystem es. The chapter then relates the participa- services and the complexities associated tory process needed to involve stakehold- with valuing these services. It then pre- ers and to integrate their perspectives into sents a cursory introduction to the decision planning processes to avoid social conflict. support tools developed by recharge.green, Such a process was implemented in the re- which are explained in more detail in later charge.green pilot regions in relation to the chapters. The tools are useful for obtaining valuation of ecosystem services and stake- an overview of renewable energy production holder preferences for different renewable siting options, insights into the potential en- energy development scenarios. Some of the vironmental costs these will engender and implemented stakeholder involvement ex- ultimately provide a basis for implementa- ercises are highlighted in the form of “best tion of plant siting decisions. practice” examples.

Chapter 2 Chapter 3 introduces the role of social sciences in land explores the role of decision support sys- use planning and renewable energy planning. tems in renewable energy planning. There It goes into some detail on ecosystem ser- are different kinds of decision support sys- vices approaches, including valuation meth- tems, but in general they are computerized ods, with particular reference to the services tools that help users to identify solutions Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 6 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

for complex situations. recharge.green de- Chapter 5 veloped four such systems, each targeted goes into the specific results produced by at different levels and pilot regions in Aus- recharge.green. It presents the protection tria, Italy, and Slovenia. One of the principal constraints that IIASA´s decision support challenges for all computerized systems is system includes according to different sce- obtaining sufficient and accurate input data. narios of protection levels. Depending on Such data are often not available or costly to the protection level chosen, different rec- obtain. DSS can be extremely powerful tools, ommendations will be made by the system. and in recharge.green they have helped to This highlights the importance of properly foster discussions, highlight conflicts and defining protected area management ob- possible solutions. They are relatively easy jectives for each area under consideration, to run, but may still require experts to oper- before applying the model to evaluate siting ate them properly. They should also not be decisions for different types of renewable thought of as providing one-stop solutions. energy. The chapter then zooms into the They can bring science into decision-making project´s pilot regions and presents the sys- processes, but still require careful reflection, tems and approaches used in the Veneto re- planning and ultimately implementation. gion (Italy), Piedmont region (Italy), Triglav National Park (Slovenia), Altusried (Bavar- Chapter 4 ia, Germany), and Leiblachtal in Vorarlberg homes in on the impacts renewable energy (Austria). Each of these regions had its own production can have on ecosystem services special focus and applied various tools in in greater detail. It differentiates between different ways. All regions, however, placed forest biomass, hydropower, wind power, great emphasis on participatory approach- and solar power impacts on provisioning, es, which are key to creating social support regulating and maintenance, and cultur- for decisions and projects, in the domain of al ecosystem services, using the Common renewable energy planning and elsewhere. International Classification of Ecosystem Services. Most impacts depend on par- We invite you to also read our additional ticular management regimes and additional publications, which are available for down- measures, but we have highlighted the major load on the recharge.green website http:// conflicts and their dimensions, which require www.recharge-green.eu/downloads/. In the trade-off decisions. download links you will also find a link to the online Decision Support Tool “JECAMI”, where you can find some geographically explicit visualization tools that recharge.green has developed. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 7 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Photo © KarinPhoto Svadlenak-Gomez ©

Balancing Alpine 1 energy and nature – the project recharge.green

Authors: SVADLENAK-GOMEZ1, Karin; WALZER, Chris1

„As fossil fuel-based energy sources are phased out, new decentralized energy production patterns must be supported by social and environmental tax reforms and policies that promote energy efficiency and minimise ecosystem impacts. The regional scale seems appropriate to elaborate sustainable energy concepts. A “sustainable energy vision for the Alps” is needed and should ensure that energy production is harmonised with the goals of nature and landscape protection.” (CIPRA , FIWI, UIBK) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 1. B a l a ncing A lpine energ y a nd n at ure – t he pro jec t rech a rge.green / 8 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: A view from outside the Alps

Luis Gomez-Echeverri, MSc., Senior Advisor to Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative

Question: The EU needs to decrease its across sectors. This is both an institutional greenhouse gas emissions and has launched problem and a problem created by the lack ambitious plans to increase renewable en- of tools for policy makers to allow them to ergy production across its entire territory. analyse the trade-offs and impacts of their The European Council has also asked the decisions. We need better tools for policy Commission to elaborate an EU Strategy for analysis and to promote synergies across the Alpine Region , which aims to ensure that sectors. But the tools need to be backed up the region retains its Alpine natural (biodi- by sound analytical frameworks that allow versity) and cultural heritage while seizing us to make projections even when there is opportunities for sustainable and innovative a lack of data (for example modelling tools development in a European context. The that use the most relevant science for the Luis Gomez-Echeverri is a Senior production and use of energy in the Alps is region to which they are applied). Tools that Advisor to the Executive Office not happening in a vacuum. What global clearly identify the trade-offs will definitely of the UN Secretary General on patterns do you see affecting developments facilitate and improve policy dialogue. the “Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL)” programme. He spear- in Alpine countries? headed and led the start up of Answer: Global demands will increasingly Question: You are involved in a project that the SE4ALL programme in over put pressures on the region´s natural re- aims to dramatically expand energy access 70 developing countries. Before sources, unless stringent protection meas- for people living in developing countries. coming to IIASA in 2007 to work ures are in effect. One of the major global Are issues such as those we looked at in on the Global Energy Assess- trends that will also affect the Alpine region recharge.green at all a concern in this pro- ment, he had a long career work- is of course climate change, with impacts cess? ing on sustainable development, across several areas: Changing weather Answer: Despite the fact that we are deal- energy, environment and climate patterns may have an effect on energy de- ing with totally different conditions, there change issues with the UNDP and mand and potentials in the region and on are some common features in the challeng- UNFCCC. linked sectors such as water, food produces that we face. Providing energy access is tion and health. Ecosystem changes may not simply about linking people to an electric lead to migration patterns that could affect transmission line. A large number of factors energy demand and have effects on fragile come into the question how to provide that ecosystems. On the positive side, renewable energy in the most sustainable way: what energy technology improvements, particu- is the cleanest and most affordable way to larly in the area of storage, and decreasing provide it, are any ecosystems being dis- costs of this technology, will allow the region turbed by a particular option, is the type of to make the use of renewable energy more energy being provided suitable for the ener- efficient. The Alpine region may also bene- gy services needed. We are not just talking fit from scientific knowledge and adaptation about light bulbs, but about all kinds of en- approaches in other regions. ergy that enhance productive capacities and livelihoods in a community. So in fact we are Question: The recharge.green decision sup- looking at the potential trade-offs. port tools can help to analyse trade-offs between new renewable energy plants and the Question: In general, what do you see as need to protect biodiversity and ecosystem the greatest barrier to sustainable develop- services in the Alps. They could be adapted ment? for any region where sufficient land-use and Answer: One of the greatest barriers is frag- other data exist. Given your experience with mentation in policy- and decision making, policy negotiation processes, do you think which we see all over the world. Rather than such tools could in fact be helpful to reach close coordination among sectors, what we better decisions? observe is competition. The internation- Answer: Certainly. One of the most serious al community is not helpful in this regard. problems that we have globally is the frag- It actually exacerbates this competition by mentation of decision- and policy-making working in a fragmented way. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 1. B a l a ncing A lpine energ y a nd n at ure – t he pro jec t rech a rge.green / 9 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The Alps are many things to many people. graphic and geological particularities, the ackground B Settled since prehistoric times, the Alpine Alps are also a biodiversity hotspot – their region features a rich cultural and industri- richly diverse ecosystems provide habitats al heritage that now extends across eight for a multitude of plant and animal species. national borders and is of great benefit to This extraordinary biological diversity is at numerous sectors. From the 19th century the same time the foundation of what today onward the region, with its abundant wa- is referred to as “ecosystem services”, the ter resources and steep slopes, benefited benefits nature provides to people. economically from the exploitation of hy- Biodiversity has increasingly been coming dropower for primary industrial production under threat from multiple sources. Alpine (e.g. iron ore and steel) and subsequently biodiversity is no exception in this regard, electricity production. Multiple-use forest even if on the surface through protected management also continues to be an impor- areas and nature protection policies, it ap- tant type of land-use in the Alps, and due to pears well protected. The indirect global natural re-growth and afforestation, forests toll of anthropogenic climate change also are now increasing in the region, having ex- affects Alpine biodiversity and ecosystems perienced a gradual decline until the end of negatively and is projected to continue to do the 19th century 1. Because of their geo- so 2,3.

One of the principal strategies to reduce whether hydropower, biomass, wind, or solar limate change C carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in order to power, have to be carefully evaluated, taking mitigation and mitigate climate change is the expansion of into account not only technical and econom- biodiversity renewable energy, which is promoted both ic potential, but also ecological sustainabili- by the Alpine Convention 4 and by the Eu- ty and social factors. Decision making pro- ropean Union 5. While in principle the use of cesses are, however, often flawed. Amongst renewable energy over fossil-fuel based en- many issues, they may lack frame control,

ergy sources allows for a reduction in CO2 rigour and focus and not assess all aspects emissions, it is also important to examine of an issue. In particular, despite legal obli- the impacts that renewable energy produc- gations to undertake environmental impact tion and use will have on natural ecosystems assessments for all major infrastructure and their functions. Although reducing cli- projects, impacts on biodiversity and trade- mate change impacts is expected to benefit offs between different ecosystem services biodiversity, these benefits could be limited tend to be insufficiently taken into account by additional adverse impacts from energy in decision making7. developments, a fact that is acknowledged This is where the EU Alpine Space recharge. in the Alpine Convention 4. For example, the green project can be of help. 16 partners total economic value of energy produced by from 6 Alpine countries, including members very small hydropower plants may well be of national parks, local government, aca- negative, given their ecological impacts and demia, civil society, and the private sector, insignificant production capacity 6. The Con- have jointly developed a set of tools to facil- vention´s Energy Protocol contains a number itate decision-making on renewable energy of clauses demanding the conservation of extraction in the Alps. The tools can help to natural areas as habitats for wildlife. This evaluate the ´renewable energy carrying ca- implies that siting decisions for new renew- pacity’ of the biodiversity-rich Alpine eco- able energy production facilities in the Alps, systems. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 1. B a l a ncing A lpine energ y a nd n at ure – t he pro jec t rech a rge.green / 10 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

It is beyond the scope of this chapter to with these approaches because it is per- conomic foundations E discuss details, but the overarching issue, ceived as a “commodification” of nature 16,17. - A caveat concerning which drives all others, is human behaviour: In a recent expert survey we undertook for ecosystem services valuation Short-term economic priorities that trump greenAlps, a related Alpine Space project, nature conservation goals are exacting a di- 42% of respondents felt that not all ecosys- rect toll, such as the disruption of ecological tem services should be assigned a market connectivity through growth-oriented infra- value18. Some argue that focusing on eco- structure development or through unsus- system services as a conservation tool risks tainable agricultural methods. The trans- detracting from overall conservation agen- formation of natural landscapes has been da, which is to protect nature for its own called a “side-effect” of all socio-economic sake 19. activities 8. Landscapes are managed based The authors of the widely quoted TEEB study on context-driven decisions, influenced by propose various valuation techniques, but factors such as the policy environment, his- also point out that valuation techniques torical traditions, and institutional or per- have limitations, and that the inadequacies sonal interests. Management decisions are of monetary valuation should be borne in often political and not necessarily rational mind in view of the possibility of irreversible from an economic point of view and even ecosystem change 12. They advise, as have less from a sustainability perspective. economists before them, the use of a pre- One of the older techniques that is often cautionary approach in situations of high used to weigh up the divergence between uncertainty or ecological thresholds 9,12. This private and social costs of public invest- is also a general principle for decision-mak- ments is cost-benefit analysis (CBA), which ing in the EU - the precautionary principle is has its roots in welfare economics 9. CBA detailed in Article 191 of the Treaty on the calculates increases or reductions in human Functioning of the European Union. It aims wellbeing arising from a project or policy. at ensuring a higher level of environmental It uses the notion of total economic value protection through preventive action in the (TEV), which measures the economic val- case of risk of environmental damage. The ues of an environmental asset (such as an World Business Council on Sustainable De- ecosystem), deconstructing it into use and velopment, a private business association non-use values. Economists have developed and think tank, points out in its Guide to Cor- various ways of estimating the intangible porate Ecosystem Valuation, that values of values of environmental assets, which we biodiversity and ecosystem services do not cannot go into here. In recent years the con- equal price lists, and that context is impor- cept of valuing biodiversity for the ecosys- tant 20. They go on to say that even estimat- tem services it underpins has been promoted values can be useful for decision-making, ed and at times hotly debated 10,11. Practical and that valuation should be seen as com- implementation, however, has remained a plementary to other tools, such as life cycle challenge 7. Markets and public accounting assessment and multi-criteria analysis. systems (GDP) still fail to trade and capture What we take from the diversity of ap- ecosystem service values. proaches and opinions in the literature and Part of the problem is the difficulty of under- within our own project team is that there is standing all the complex linkages between still a lack of a consistent and practical defi- ecosystem functioning, biodiversity, the nition of ecosystem services “units” that impact of human activities, and the intrica- could be compared to those used to value cies of differential impacts across time and conventional goods and services that are space 12. Efforts to further the understand- used in national accounting. On the other ing of ecosystem service values have been hand the definition of ecosystem servic- ongoing across Europe 13–15. Market-based es at a regional or local scale can be a very instruments, such as green accounting, useful awareness-raising tool to draw at- payment for environmental services, and tention to the full value of ecosystems to mitigation banking have been proposed as people. Recharge.green has demonstrated effective conservation tools , but there is this through a practical approach in the pi- also a great deal of discomfort among some lot areas of Vorarlberg and the Veneto re- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 1. B a l a ncing A lpine energ y a nd n at ure – t he pro jec t rech a rge.green / 11 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

gion. Attempts to use a generic ecosystem cost-benefit calculation could muddy the services model without regard to contex- waters and prevent us from seeing the ma- tual variations could yield very misleading jor institutional changes that are needed to results. Moreover, focusing only on a pure safeguard our natural environment.

Scientists are often accused of working in an ponents of the recharge.green toolkit, includ- cience based S - ivory tower, detached from on-the-ground ing various model scenarios were field-tested decision-making reality. Nevertheless, policy makers often in four pilot regions in Austria, Germany, Italy, support ask for scientific information to help them and Slovenia. In addition, participatory meth- devise policies. Even if ultimately many de- ods were developed and tested to raise aware- cisions have to be judgement calls, having ness on landscape values and on the benefits robust tools at hand to inform judgement of ecosystem services among residents of can be very useful. The recharge.green team individual regions. Taken together, the vari- has made efforts to bridge the perceived ous components of the recharge.green toolkit gap between scientific knowledge and re- support integrating biodiversity and ecosys- al-life implementation. The project has pro- tem costs with economic and carbon reduc- duced guidance and tools to enhance the tion benefits to enable rational and all-inclu- decision-making process with respect to sive energy implementation decisions. the four most common types of renewable The recharge.green models are not perfect, energy sources in the Alps: biomass, hydro, stand-alone tools that can provide a one-stop solar, and wind, and has tested them in vari- decision. Careful reflection, planning and ulti- ous pilot regions. mately implementation is still necessary. The One component of the recharge.green toolkit models are only as good as the datasets and is a model that can support siting decisions information that flows into them and can only at an Alps-wide scale and, provided that data function within the clearly defined contextu- are available, can be programmed to zoom in al framework of the decision making process. to a regional or even municipal scale. To an- We have found that adequate data are often alyse economic and ecological trade-offs, a hard to obtain – even when these should be ‘marginal protection cost curve’ was devel- readily available, as, more often than not, ac- oped, which the model uses when calculating quisition has been previously publicly financed. the per-unit costs of renewable energy pro- Lack of data sharing among institutions is a duction. Theoretical potentials for renewable major issue in many projects. Furthermore, energy production were calculated and fed the inputs to our models are of necessity fed into the model. In areas with higher levels of by proxy indicators for biodiversity “hotspots”, protection, energy production is inherently which may not necessarily provide a complete more costly (or not possible), and so the tool picture of the real situation on the ground. For allows decision-makers to gain insights into example, for the Alpine-scale spatially explicit the trade-offs involved when planning energy r.green model, indicators included the level of facilities. While areas may have theoretical protection of an area and the theoretical po- energy production potential, they are poten- tential for different types of renewable ener- tially economically unsuitable when integrat- gy. However, protection status alone is a poor ing environmental impacts and costs into the indicator of biodiversity in the area. Bearing decision making process. To facilitate the use these caveats in mind, the tools are imminent- of the tools by lay-persons, the various mod- ly useful in obtaining an overview of renewable els were integrated into the map-based online energy production siting options, insights into visualisation tool Jecami (http://www.jecami. the potential environmental costs these will eu/), which was developed within the ETC Al- engender and ultimately provide a basis for pine Space project ECONNECT. Different com- implementation of plants. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 1. B a l a ncing A lpine energ y a nd n at ure – t he pro jec t rech a rge.green / 12 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. EEA (2002): Europe’s biodiversity - biogeographical regions and seas. The Alpine Region - mountains of Europe. 52 (European Environment Agency, 2002). Download: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/report_2002_0524_154909 2. Beniston, M. (2012): Impacts of climatic change on water and associated economic activities in the Swiss Alps. Journal of Hydrology 412-413, 291–296 (2012). 3. Pauli, H.; Gottfried, M. & Grabherr, G. (2014): Effects of climate change on the alpine and nival vegetation of the Alps. Journal of mountain ecology 7, (2014). 4. EC (2005): Protocol on the implementation of the Alpine Convention of 1991 in the field of energy. Official Journal of the European Union 36–41 (2005). 5. EC (2009): Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC Text with EEA relevance. Official Journal of the European Union L 140, 16–62 (2009). 6. BN (2012): Einstimmig beschlossene Resolution der BN-Delegiertenversammlung am 29. April 2012 in Günzburg. Schutz der Fließgewässer in Bayern: Kein weiterer Ausbau der Wasserkraft. (2012). Download: http://www.bund-naturschutz.de/uploads/media/ DV_Resolution-gegen-Wasserkraftausbau_DV-2012_12-04-29.pdf 7. Guerry, A. D. et al. (2015): Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 7348–7355 (2015). 8. Boesch, M. (2014): The Political Dimension of Landscape Management - Conservation and promotion of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Alps. (2014). Download: http://www.greenalps-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ 20141125_ Pr%C3%A4sentation_MartinBoesch1.pdf 9. Pearce, D. W.; Atkinson, G. & Mourato, S. (2006): Cost-benefit analysis and the environment: recent developments. (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2006). Download: http://www.lne.be/themas/beleid/milieueconomie/ downloadbare-bestanden/ME11_cost-benefit%20analysis%20and%20the%20 environment%20oeso.pdf 10. Braat, L. C. & de Groot, R. (2012): The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosystem Services 1, 4–15. 11. West, A. (2015); Core Concept: Ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 7337–7338. 12. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2010): Ecological and Economic Foundations. (Earthscan, 2010). Download: http://www.teebweb.org/our-publications/ teeb-study-reports/ecological-and-economic-foundations 13. Sukhdev, P. et al. (2010): Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. (TEEB, 2010). 14. Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung (2014): Naturkapital Deutschland - TEEB.DE. (2014). Check: http://www.naturkapital-teeb.de/aktuelles.html 15. BISE (2014): Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) — Biodiversity Information system for Europe. Download: http://biodiversity.europa.eu/ maes 16. Boisvert, V.; Méral, P. & Froger, G. (2013): Market-Based Instruments for Ecosystem Services: Institutional Innovation or Renovation? Society & Natural Resources 26, 1122–1136 . 17. Norgaard, R. B. (2010): Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69, 1219–1227. 18. greenAlps (2014): greenAlps - connecting mountains people nature (2014). Download: http://www.greenalps-project.eu/download. 19. McCauley, D. J. (2006): Selling out on nature. Nature 443, 27–28 (2006). 20. WBCSD (2011): Guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuation. Download: http://www.wbcsd. org/pages/edocument/edocumentdetails.aspx?id=104&nosearchcontextkey=true 21. Svadlenak-Gomez, K., Badura, M., Kraxner, F., Fuss, S., Vettorato, D., Walzer, C.(2013): Valuing Alpine ecosystems: The recharge.green project will help decision-makers to reconcile renewable energy production and biodiversity conservation in the Alps (2013) Eco.mont, 5 (1), pp. 59-62. T T le bl a e bl a 2

of of C C ntent n e t on t n e t on s s 4/5 1/2/3 ecosystem services ecosystem Social science and BALEST, Jessica BALEST, Authors: late in the game by involving stakeholders from the planning stage.” (CIPRA) stage.” planning the from stakeholders involving by game the in late projects their to objections against guard may who producers energy for including benefits, long-term yield would this for needed effort and time considerable The aproject. throughout and the start from right to information, all relevant and access processes, transparent pect ex to able be should NGOs, and media the including Stakeholders, conflicts. these with deal to important very are processes governance moderated professionally Balanced, ture. na and landscape on demands diverging from result conflicts issue, the is land-use “Where MIOTELLO, Francesca MIOTELLO, 8 ; GEITNER, Clemens ; GEITNER, 15 ; PALETTO, Alessandro ; PALETTO, 7 ; GRILLI, Gianluca ; GRILLI, 17 ; VRŠČAJ, Borut ; VRŠČAJ, 8 ; HASTIK, Richard ; HASTIK, 2 7 ; 13 - -

Photo © Fabio Pastorella Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Social science and ecosystem services / 14 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: The importance of valuation of ecosystem services

Prof. Davide Pettenella, University of Padova

Question: What is the role of social science Question: Why is the economic valuation of in land use planning (renewable energy plan- ecosystem services in land use planning (re- ning)? newable energy planning) important? Answer: It is an essential role: economics Answer: An economic assessment, as al- can be used for defining the net benefits ready mentioned, can be a powerful tool (both from a public perspective and a pri- for understanding the creation of value, the vate point of view) of the investment, like a distribution of benefits and costs, the trade- new power plant. In the case of a public ap- offs among various alternative services (e.g. proach, not only market but also non-market biomass used for energy vs. timber). When impacts should be evaluated and this can an investment can be measured in economic Davide Pettenella is full professor make the assessment quite complex. More- terms it can be compared to other invest- at the University of Padova (Italy) over, the evaluation shouldn’t just be a neu- ments (e.g. is it more profitable to build a where is teaching Forest economics tral, technical operation made by outsiders: hydropower-plant or some infrastructure to and policy. He has published more local stakeholders have to be involved in the prevent avalanche damages?) and to define than 500 papers in the field of forest economics and wood products process, and this implies the use of special the optimal size of an investment (e.g. the marketing as a result of his research approaches in stakeholders’ involvement proper size of a biomass plant?). activities and field works carried out where sociologists and experts in communi- within programmes financed by the cation and local governance systems should Question: In your opinion how could the use European Commission, FAO, Euro- play a role. Sometimes renewable energy of renewable energy in the Alps develop in pean Forestry Institute, World Bank, and by Italian national and regional has to be sold on the market like a normal the future? institutions. commodity, and here experts in (green) Answer: Technology applied to renewable marketing may play a role. Finally, on a mac- energy generation has seen huge progress ro scale, when dealing with issues of nation- and we no longer face problems of ener- al or regional planning, again economists gy scarcity in mountain areas. Not only are and experts in political science may have a the Alps able to satisfy the internal demand role in forecasting demand and supply de- for energy, they can also provide energy to velopment, prices and in setting the proper areas outside the region. The real issue system of market regulation. that we are facing in the future is political: how much and what type of compensation Question: What are the strengths and weak- should be paid for this role of energy provid- nesses of a participatory approach in the er? How to distribute the costs and benefits development of renewable energy? of theses energy services? How to find a Answer: Adopting a participatory approach balance among the different renewable en- in the local development of renewable ener- ergy sources? What is the carrying capacity gy is not a strengthening factor in decision of the Alpine system, what are the environ- making but a basic requirement! It is not only mentally and socially acceptable thresholds a matter of reducing risks, preventing con- for power generation? These are all answers flicts and getting public support for the in- that need a multidisciplinary approach by vestments. It is connected with the idea that policy makers and an advanced system of normally renewable resources are linked to good governance. the supply of public or common goods (environmental services), i.e. goods that – by definition – are not private and should be managed through public consultation. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 15 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 2.1 Introduction of the ecosystem services approach

The concept of ecosystem services was first in contrast to the TEEB and MEA classifica- proposed in 1983 by Paul Ehrlich and Harold tions, CICES regards “biodiversity” as total Mooney, and since then its use in the scien- sum of life and a basis for all (biotic) eco- tific literature has grown rapidly. Ecosystem system services and not as an ecosystem services are defined in the Millennium Eco- service itself. Despite the problems related system Assessment (MEA) as the “benefits to an exact categorization and definition people obtain from ecosystems”. of ecosystem services, the importance of ecosystem services for human life as well These ecosystem services include a large as wildlife is widely recognized by both the variety of aspects such as food and fodder scientific community and political decision production, provision of raw materials, pol- makers. Simply put, preserving ecosystem lination, climate- and water regulation, wa- services means preserving the life of terres- ter supply, erosion control, soil formation, trial ecosystems. Human wellbeing depends nutrient cycling, carbon sink, green-house on ecosystem services, and most of them gas cycling, biological control, genetic re- cannot be replaced artificially, so their pres- sources, recreation and cultural values. Over ervation and maintenance is a crucial chal- the years, several classification schemes of lenge for the future. ecosystem services have been elaborated, for instance the classifications used by the However, current management practices above-mentioned MEA, by TEEB (The Eco- often lead to a loss of ecosystem function. nomics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity), or This trend is particularly visible in mountain by CICES (Common International Classifi- areas, including in the Alps. The development cation of Ecosystem Services). These clas- of renewable energy is one of several an- sification schemes differentiate ecosystem thropogenic pressures that threaten Alpine services on the basis of their function: ecosystems, putting at risk the region´s high levels of biodiversity, fragile ecosystems, ●● 1. Provisioning services: material or recreational value and the diversity of cul- energy outputs from ecosystem such as tural identities. Alpine ecosystems provide food production (e.g. fish, meat, honey, several goods and services such as protec- mushrooms and berries), provision of tion against natural hazards (i.e. landslides, raw materials (e.g. timber, wood for bi- avalanches and rock falls), carbon dioxide oenergy), water supply; sequestration, fodder, timber, renewable raw ●● 2. Regulating services: benefits ob- material for energy production (bio-energy), tained from the regulation of ecosystem tourism and recreation (hiking, biking, hunt- processes such as water and climate ing, etc.), freshwater, and biodiversity. regulation, pollination, hydrogeological protection, soil erosion control; Potential conflicts may and often do develop ●● 3. Cultural services: non-material between nature conservation and renewa- benefits that people obtain from forests ble energy development. The development through spiritual enrichment, cognitive of the different renewable energy sources development, recreation and aesthetic (i.e. hydropower, wind power, solar thermal experience; energy and forest biomass) could have an ●● 4. Supporting services: necessary for effect on ecosystems and biodiversity, with the production of all other ecosystem negative consequences on the quality of the services such as natural diversity, plant benefits provided by ecosystem services. In production, soil formation and nutrient particular, renewable energy development cycling. may cause soil loss and degradation and a loss of biodiversity. In addition it may have a There are some differences among the dif- negative effect on the landscape´s aesthetic ferent classification schemes. For example, beauty. Notwithstanding the above, the ef- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 16 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 2.1.1 Ecosystem services examples from Vorarlberg - Hoher Reschen. 1 Provisioning Services, 2 Regulation and Maintenance Services, 3 Cultural Services. (Source UIBK – HASTIK, Richard)

fects of renewable energy development on In order to overcome this limitation, many the environment are not purely negative. On economic valuation methods have been de- the whole, it is necessary to balance the pos- veloped and applied for the assessment of itive impact (reduction of the dependence on the values of different ecosystem services. fossil fuels through the use of renewable en- The economic valuation methods - such as ergy sources), with other aspects of nature contingent valuation (CV), the travel cost conservation, which leads to a trade-off sit- method (TCM), the replacement cost meth- uation. od, choice experiments, and the benefit transfer method - allow assigning a total Unsustainable practices are driven by a mar- value to ecosystem services, even in the ab- ket logic that does not take into account the sence of a market. Benefits might include, social and environmental costs. Generally for example, climate and water regulation, speaking, the value of ecosystem services protection against natural hazards, or land- is often not included in the political deci- scape amenity and recreation (See Science: sion-making process because many bene- Total Economic Value (TEV) of ecosystem fits supplied by natural ecosystems have no services). market prices. So-called “negative exter- nalities” (the external costs of economic ac- Recharge.green evaluated both market and tivities that impose a negative effect on third non-market ecosystem services in some parties, often society at large) of unsustain- of the project´s pilot regions. Based on in- able production or consumption practices formation from these evaluations, deci- occur because natural resources tend to be sion makers may now formulate effective public goods (such as air, which people may strategies and choose optimal locations use freely without paying for such use). Be- for renewable energy that can preserve the cause public goods are perceived as “free for environment and at the same time produce all”, their real value is not as obvious to users renewable energy efficiently. A list of nine fi- as that of private and marketable goods. In nal ecosystem services was developed (see the absence of a market price the economic Chapter 4). In the present study the eco- value of these benefits is not clearly defined, system services are divided into three main and it could happen that the cost of con- groups: provisioning services, regulating and servation appears higher than the benefits, maintenance services and cultural services when in reality the benefits of conservation as proposed by the CICES classification. could be quite high if properly accounted for. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 17 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: Total Economic Value (TEV) of ecosystem services

The Economics of Ecosystem and Biodi- ●● Option value: the value of conserving re- versity (TEEB) study emphasizes that eco- sources unused today in order to obtain system services are closely linked to eco- higher benefits in the future (mainly de- nomics. The main goal of TEEB is to define a rived from the current rate of interest); reliable methodology for valuing ecosystem ●● Quasi-option value: the value of leaving services, trying to understand the environ- resources today in order to obtain ben- mental costs and benefits of exploiting nat- efits due to alternative -and still undis- ural resources and loss of biodiversity. The covered - uses in the future; underlying idea of TEEB is that the value of ●● Non-use values: values of the resourc- an ecosystem is not only related to exploit- es themselves, without considering the able goods, there are several other benefits interactions with humans (i.e. existence whose value is less clear because they have value, intrinsic and bequest values). no market price. If the non-market benefits were included in planning, the damages con- The TEV approach focuses on the fact that nected with the exploitation of the environ- the value of nature is more complex than ment could be assessed more comprehen- the mere consumption of goods. Managing sively. This idea is strictly linked to the total resources based only on harvestable quan- economic value (TEV) approach, stating that tities of goods may considerably deplete the the value of natural resources is composed total benefits people obtain from ecosys- of several components: tems. Including conservation-related and ●● Direct use value: the benefit obtained non-use values in the planning phase of de- from a direct consumption of the re- cision-making is fundamental to predicting source; the real effects of development projects on ●● Indirect use value: the benefit derived the environment. from an interaction between users and nature but without consumption of the resource (e.g. recreation in a forest);

Further Reading 1. Costanza R., d’Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., et al. (1997): The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-260. 2. Grilli G., Paletto A., De Meo I. (2014): Economic Valuation of Forest Recreation in an Alpine valley. Baltic Forestry 20(1): 167-175. 3. Paletto A., Geitner C., Grilli G., Hastik R., Pastorella F., Rodrìguez Garcìa L. (2015): Mapping the value of ecosystem services: A case study from the Austrian Alps. Annals of Forest Research 58(1):157-175. 4. Rodrìguez Garcìa L., Curetti G., Garegnani G., Grilli G., Pastorella F., Paletto A. (2015): La valoración de los servicios ecosistémicos en los ecosistemas forestales: el caso de estudio en Los Alpes Italianos. Bosque (in press). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 18 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 2.2 Participatory processes and social impact assessment

Social acceptance is an important issue that fined as a voluntary process whereby people, shapes the development of renewable en- individually or through organized groups, can ergy and the implementation of new tech- exchange information, express opinions and nologies needed to achieve the EU energy articulate interests, and have the poten- policy targets (Renewable Energy Directive tial to influence decisions or the outcome 2009/28/EC). It is necessary to understand of the matter in hand. Public participation stakeholders’ perspectives on the use of in the decision-making process implies the renewable energy technologies and their involvement of different interest groups (in- impacts on natural resources. The site-se- terest group participation approach) and/ lection process for the development of re- or the involvement of people (direct citizen newable energy facilities (siting) and the participation approach) 3. The interest group choice of renewable energy technologies participation approach refers to the prin- are potential causes of social conflict 9. This ciples of representative democracy where kind of social conflict could be called “green citizens’ interests are represented in groups on green” conflict because renewable energy (i.e. associations, private organizations, development generates global environmen- public administrations). Inversely, the direct tal benefits on the one hand, and potential citizen participation approach refers to the negative local impacts on visual landscape, concept of direct democracy that assumes nature conservation and wildlife on the that such groups cannot represent the com- other hand. In order to address these con- plexity of society’s interests and therefore flicts and to increase the social acceptance can be an obstacle to real democracy 2. of decisions, a possible solution is to use a participatory approach in decision-making processes 1. Public participation can be de-

In the recharge.green project a four-step experts, stakeholders representing interest A four-step participatory process for renewable ener- groups, and citizens. The four steps of the participatory process gy planning on the local scale (pilot regions) participatory process were: (1) expert con- was developed to integrate both the interest sultation; (2) stakeholder analysis; (3) valu- group participation approach and the di- ing and mapping of ecosystem services; and rect citizen participation approach. Conse- (4) stakeholder involvement. quently, the participatory process involved

The first step of the participatory process The experts were identified by the partners Expert consultation was an expert consultation aimed at gath- of the recharge.green project taking into ac- ering information about the status quo of count three main criteria: (1) expertise on renewable energy in the recharge.green pi- ecosystem services and/or renewable en- lot regions. The main pieces of information ergy, (2) knowledge of the local context, (3) collected during this step were: (1) potential no direct stake in the activities of recharge. development of renewable energy sources green. (i.e. hydropower, wind power, solar thermal energy and forest biomass); (2) potential The required information was collected impacts of renewable energy development through semi-structured questionnaires in on ecosystem services and local socio-eco- face-to-face interviews with the identified nomic characteristics; (3) map of the stake- local experts. The positive and negative im- holders to be involved in future steps of the pacts of renewable energy development on decision-making process (stakeholder anal- the baseline scenario were evaluated by the ysis). All this information was collected with experts using a 5-point Likert scale (from specific reference to each pilot region. very negative to very positive impacts). This Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 19 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

was done for eight ecosystem services be- capita, social and community aggregation, longing to three categories (provisioning, political stability, human health and property regulating and cultural services). In addition, rights and rights of use (Box 4.2). the impacts of renewable energy development were assessed taking into account All information collected through question- ten socio-economic indicators related to a naires was useful for assessing strengths standard Social Impact Assessment (SIA) (development potential) and weaknesses procedure, such as local market diversifica- (environmental and social impacts) of the tion, local entrepreneurship, waste manage- development of renewable energy in the pilot ment system, resource efficiency, employ- regions. ment of local workforce, income growth per

The term “stakeholder” refers to any individ- ● Secondary stakeholders are those who takeholder analysis ● S ual or group of people, organized or unorgan- have a marginal effect on the results of ized, who share a common interest or stake the project. in a particular issue or system. Stakeholder analysis is aimed at identifying and classi- In addition, the stakeholders were also ana- fying the stakeholders in order to determine lysed from the relational point of view using the extent of their future involvement in the the social network analysis (SNA) approach. decision-making process. This stage is par- SNA is a formal theory to define and analyse ticularly delicate because on the one hand a the relationships that stakeholders have large number of stakeholders can delay the with each other. This technique is crucial to decision-making process, while on the other address a diverse set of issues that are im- hand the exclusion of relevant stakeholders portant to society and can facilitate conflict may compromise the process, delegitimise resolution among the users, increase oppor- the decisions taken and increase conflicts tunities for peer-to-peer learning and col- between interest groups. lective actions, and foster the dissemination In the recharge.green project the stake- of information. In this context, SNA was ap- holder analysis was performed by experts plied to identify which key stakeholders are in three phases: (1) in the first phase all the in a central position in the social network, at stakeholders who affect and/or are affect- local level, for each pilot region. In particu- ed by the policies, decisions, and actions lar, the network was analysed considering of the system were recognized and listed professional relationships in the manage- (brainstorming session); (2) in the second ment of natural resources and renewable phase stakeholders previously identified energy development, and the strength of were classified considering some personal these relationships (strong tie and weak tie). characteristics (i.e. power, legitimacy, ur- Stakeholders with a strong tie tend to have a gency and proximity); (3) in the third phase similar background, they share similar views the stakeholders´ professional relationships and, due to ease of communication, their were analysed (social network). During the communication is effective even with com- second phase the stakeholders were divided plex information. Conversely, weak ties are into three main categories: key stakehold- generally characterized by low emotional in- ers, primary stakeholders and secondary tensity and sporadic communication among stakeholders. different actors, not structured to transmit complex information. ●● Key stakeholders are those who can significantly influence or are important for Stakeholders - identified through the stake- the success of the project. holder analysis and classified using the SNA ●● Primary stakeholders are those who are approach - were invited to participate ac- affected either positively (beneficiaries) tively in the last step of the process (round or negatively by the results of the pro- tables). ject. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 20 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

The European Commission introduced an in- enterprises’ and the effects on business tegrated Impact Assessment (IA) system in opportunities and productive diversifi- 2002 defined as “a tool to improve the qual- cation of the area. ity and coherence of the policy development 3. Waste management system: a service to process. Impact Assessment identifies the collect, transport, and treat waste from likely positive and negative impacts of pro- a certain area in an adequate manner. posed policy actions, enabling informed po- 4. Resource efficiency: use of natural re- litical judgments to be made about the pro- sources, with the main purpose of min- posal and identify trade-offs in achieving imising their input when producing a competing objectives”. The importance of IA product or delivering a service. as a process more than a simple tool is fur- 5. Employment of local workforce: the in- ther emphasized in the revised version of the stallation, operation and maintenance European Commission’s IA guidelines: “Im- of renewable energy technologies are pact assessment is a set of logical steps to often of modest scales, so they create be followed when you prepare policy propos- more employment, for the local work- als. It is a process that prepares evidence for force. political decision-makers on the advantages 6. Increasing income per capita: income and disadvantages of possible policy options per capita is a positive variable of social by assessing their potential impacts”. welfare, and is often an effect of techni- Social IA (SIA) can be defined as the appli- cal progress. cation of the IA process to the identification 7. Social and community aggregation: im- and analysis of the social impacts of a given pacts on the capacity to improve local policy or action. The benefits of SIA approach people´s participation (i.e. social and po- are: (i) the application of social issues to litical empowerment, participative de- other policy areas; (ii) the transparency of cision-making, participatory integrated the process (which involves stakeholders), assessment). (iii) the increased awareness of social con- 8. Political stability: citizens’ acceptance text among decision makers, (iv) the poten- of the system or, in other words, the tial of avoiding costs related to unforeseen potential of conflicts induced by energy social problems that could arise after policy systems, and the citizens’ participation implementation. in the decision making process. The main indicators of the SIA can be sum- 9. Human health: health hazards for the lo- marized as: cal population linked to renewable ener- 1. Local market diversification: alloca- gy production (potential health impact tion of resources over a large number due to severe accidents; health conse- of markets in an attempt to reduce the quences of normal operations). risks of concentrating resources and to 10. Property rights and rights of use: land exploit the economies of flexibility. and resource tenure, dependencies on 2. Local entrepreneurship: propensity of foreign sources (e.g. financial invest- the local population to initiate business ments, knowledge), customary rights.

Further Reading 1. European Commission, (2002): Communication from the Commission on Impact Assessment. COM (2002) 276 final. 2. European Commission, (2009): Impact Assessment Guidelines. SEC(2009) 92. 50 p. 3. Wilkinson D., Fergusson M., Bowyer C., Brown J., Ladefoged A., Monkhouse C. Zdanowicz A. (2004): Sustainable Development in the European Commission’s Integrated Impact Assessments for 2003. Institute for European Environmental Policy, London. 47 p. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 21 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

In the third step of the process the ecosys- (e.g. carbon sequestration and protection Valuing and mapping tem services were assessed in each pilot against natural hazards) and cultural servic- ecosystem services region and the relationship between ecosys- es (e.g. recreation). tem services and stakeholders was analysed through the lens of economic evaluation and In addition, the economic values of ecosys- spatial distribution of the benefits to soci- tem services were made spatially explicit ety. using a Geographical Information System (GIS) approach, and taking into account the In each pilot region three categories of eco- ecological characteristics of each ecosys- system services were evaluated from an tem service. The spatial distribution of eco- economic point of view using the total ecosystem services could provide useful infor- nomic value (TEV) approach (see Box “Total mation for decision makers, allowing them Economic Value (TEV) of ecosystem servic- to better define and implement renewable es”): provisioning services (e.g. wood and energy development strategies. non-wood products), regulating services

The last step in the participatory process Public administrations, associations and takeholder S was the consultation of stakeholders (indi- non-governmental organizations (NGOs), involvement vidual citizens and interest groups) to high- private companies and citizens can add val- light their opinions on and preferences for ue to decisions. Participants can improve scenarios of renewable energy development decisions with their local knowledge and and the potential impact of renewable ener- opinions. gy development on ecosystem services and the local economy. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 22 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: Challenges of the participatory approach

In the last few decades participatory ap- in the organizers and the institutions. An proaches in decision-making processes impossibility to influence important issues linked to natural resources management could result in unresolvable conflicts, lack of have become an alternative to traditional trust in decision-makers and, above all, lack top-down approaches. Participatory ap- of collaboration in the implementation phas- proaches are based on the consideration es. The goals of every participatory process of stakeholder preferences and opinions must be made clear from the start. in decision-making processes. The main Presence: it is often difficult to convince the advantages of the participatory approach stakeholders to participate. Facilitators can compared to the traditional approach are: invite, inform and listen, but people are often increasing public awareness, generation of difficult to engage. The active and individual knowledge useful to improve the quality of seeking out of people is a useful tool to in- decisions, rapprochement between author- volve local stakeholders and residents. ities and citizens, prevention and solution Conflict: Early involvement of stakeholders of potential conflicts between users, and and residents is an instrument to gain trust legitimization of the decision-making pro- and it requires a timely discussion about cess. Conversely, the application of a partic- a project (main objectives, ways to obtain ipatory process may run into some barriers them, people to involve, important issues). and limits, such as lack of influence on the The inclusion of stakeholders only in lat- final decision, inability or unwillingness to er phases could lead to conflicts, because participate in making decisions, inability or viewpoints and goals of decision-makers unwillingness to share and create a debate were not made clear from the onset. and two-way communication. Trust: Trust is a concept that includes sev- Representativeness: Decision-makers usu- eral aspects linked to the relationship be- ally choose to decide on the basis of rep- tween institutions and citizens and it might resentative democracy principles. A good influence (positively or negatively) individ- decision should be speedy and specific. uals’ willingness to engage in participatory However, in many cases linked to environ- efforts. Participatory methods act through mental issues it would be better to involve a mechanism that places all participants stakeholders in the decision-making pro- on an equal level. It is very important to dis- cess: more viewpoints, better decisions, and cuss about an issue without communicative fewer environmental conflicts about contro- barriers. When the level of trust in a local versial issues. context is low it is preferable to involve a fa- Structure of participatory process: A par- cilitator who can create a trust relationship ticipatory process includes different ac- with and between participants. tions: information, consultation, interaction Participatory processes should be organized between actors. Each kind of action is im- depending on the features of each case. One portant. Care has to be taken to communi- should consider the main goals, involved ac- cate transparently in the information phase, tors, important issues, ways of communica- as citizens and stakeholders could lose trust tion, and modes of participation.

Further Reading 1. Appelstrand M. (2002): Participation and societal values: the challenge for lawmakers and policy practitioners. Forest Policy and Economics 4: 281-290. 2. Beierle T.C., Konisky D.M. (2000): Values, Conflict, and Trust in Participatory Environmental Planning, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19(4): 587-602. 3. Verschuuren J. (2004): Public participation regarding the elaboration and approval of projects in the EU after the Aarhus Convention. In: T.F.M. Etty, H. Somsen (eds.), Yearbook of European Environmental Law, Vol. 4, University Press, Oxford, 29-48. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 23 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The most important element of participa- on the number of issues discussed. During tory techniques is paying attention to peo- these meetings, many instruments were ple through the creation of mechanisms of used (maps, colours and posters) to collect trust and mutual listening. Discussion is an information and preferences from partici- instrument through which it is possible to pants, with the facilitator playing an arbitra- understand the reasons and feelings of par- tion role. ticipants. Round tables are an appropriate means for considering all points of view of When organizing a round table there are the participants. Consequently, during the many aspects to be considered. First and organization of a round table the following foremost are the issues to be addressed key aspects were taken into account: (1) during the participatory process. In our case, stakeholders to be involved in the process, it was decided to address general issues re- (2) tools to be used, (3) issues to be ad- lated to renewable energy (e.g. “What are dressed, (4) objectives to be achieved. positive/negative aspects of renewable energy in the pilot region?”), and then focus on The choice of stakeholders to be involved the results of the decision support system. in round tables is of crucial importance be- Clear objectives and language are important cause they play a key role in the definition to collect results from a round table. Second, of priorities and in data collection. In this related to the objectives to be achieved and project all stakeholders - previously identi- the definition of a shared scenario of re- fied during the stakeholder analysis - were newable energy development and the social invited to participate in round tables, with perception of impacts of different renewable project leaders trying to persuade them of energies on ecosystem services and econo- the importance of their collaboration in the my, it is key to pay attention to the charac- decision-making process. The involvement teristics, viewpoints and language of partic- of all the important residents and groups of ipants. The agreed scenario should be clearly interests created a local map of viewpoints described at the end of the round table or in a and goals (e.g. production vs. environmen- follow-up paper. talism). Finally, the competencies, knowledge, and With regard to the tools to be used in the cultural background of participants are fun- participatory process, it was decided to in- damental elements of the participatory pro- vite local stakeholders, facilitators and part- cess. The involvement of as many essential ners of the recharge.green project to round local residents and interest groups as possi- tables. Normally, these round tables lasted ble is important for the success of the par- from 90 to 120 minutes and were repeated ticipatory meeting. many times (two to four times) depending Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 24 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Bell D., Gray T., Haggett C. (2005): “The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses” Environmental politics, 14, 4: 460-477. 2. Dryzek J.S. (2000): Deliberative democracy and beyond. Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 208 pp. 3. Elsasser P. (2007): Do “stakeholders” represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany. Forest Policy and Economics 9: 1018-1030. 4. Grilli G., Curetti G., De Meo I., Garegnani G., Miotello F., Poljanec A., Vettorato D., Paletto A. (2015): Experts’ perceptions of the effects of forest biomass harvesting on sustainability in the Alpine region. South-East European Forestry 6(1): 77-95. 5. Grimble R., Wellard K. (1997): Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55(2): 173-193. 6. Korhonen K., Hujala T., Kurttila M. (2013): Diffusion of Voluntary Protection among Family Forest Owners: Decision Process and Success factors. Forest Policy and Economics 26: 82–90. 7. Paletto A., Ferretti F., De Meo I. (2012): The Role of Social Networks in Forest Landscape Planning. Forest Policy and Economics 15: 132-139. 8. Prell C., Hubacek K., Reed M. (2009): Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 22: 501-518. 9. Van der Horst, D. (2007): “NIMBY or Not? Exploring the Relevance of Location and the Politics of Voiced Opinions in Renewable Energy Siting Controversies.” Energy Policy 35(5): 2705–14. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 25 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Best practice example: Stakeholder involvement in the Maè valley pilot region

The participatory process adopted in the ley level, one month after the first meeting: Maè Valley pilot region can be considered a this allowed people to elaborate information best practice example. The methodology and to have discussions among the various adopted for the participatory process was stakeholders. They could put their inputs on divided into three steps. the “blank” maps or send them directly to a The first step was an informative meeting specific mail address. This second meeting with the aim of presenting the whole project was focused on evaluation. Stakeholders to citizens of the valley, public administra- were asked to provide information about tions and technicians and local associations. their valley, in particular they were asked to The second and third steps were based on fill in a questionnaire to rank a selected num- round tables, organized with the support of ber of values of their territory (i.e. ecological an external facilitator to help people make value, touristic value, social value, economic suggestions focusing on the specific issues value, historical and cultural value, personal of hydropower and forest biomass develop- and family value, landscape). People’s choic- ment. Stakeholders involved were selected es were shared among the participants and from categories suggested by experts, par- justified, also providing new information for ticipants to the first meeting, and interested the categories of ecosystem services, sim- people “captured” through advertising ma- ply drawing them on a “blank” map in A0 terial (i.e. flyers, posters) displayed at the format. The final result was a ranking of the information points of the valley. ecosystem services in the pilot region that A first information round table was organ- reflected the personal opinions of the stake- ized at municipal level. During this meeting, holders. participants were presented with the frame- Maè valley mirrors the situation of many Al- work of the project and the first results, and pine valleys: partial isolation from the valley how they could be involved in the following floor, depopulation, needs to provide a con- activities. The meeting was an opportuni- nection to infrastructure and technologi- ty to collect comments on and suggestions cal networks. The ranking showed that the for a decision support system (DSS) and for social, personal and economic values were the analysis of ecosystem services. At the considered most important by stakeholders, end stakeholders were provided with mate- who stressed the need to maintain people in rials, such as ecosystem services maps, and the valley and give them job opportunities some “blank” maps, where they could draw and services, and social gatherings. All these their own inputs and suggestions, to com- aspects are the basis for the development plete the analysis of the ecosystem services of the valley, and consequently they repre- of their valley. sent an opportunity to define a sustainable A second meeting was organized at the val- future.

Further Reading 1. Report about round tables for the pilot areas Mis and Maè Valley, Erica Zangrando, Simone Bertin, Francesca Miotello, Alessia Portaccio (http://www.recharge-green.eu/ wp-content/uploads/2012/12/RV_Focus-groups_-Report_05_2015.pdf) 2. Pianificazione sostenibile in aree montane - Nachhaltige Raumplanung in Berggebieten. Autori vari - Verschiedene Autoren. Progetto Susplan, Interreg IV Italia Austria. (http:// www.simfvg.it/doc/susplan/CMC_pubblicaz_WEB.pdf Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 26 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 2.3 Ecosystem services and soil functions

Various ecosystem services defined by yet rarely considered or are under-valued CICES strongly correlate with soil functions in the planning process. This is even true (Table 2.3.1). They are defined for instance, for larger projects that require a strategic by the soil protocol of the Alpine Convention environmental assessment. Therefore, and by the Austrian standard for evaluating chapter 4 not only presents ecosystem soil functions (ÖNORM). Depending on the services impacts from expanding renewable energy source, soil resources are affected energy production, but also discusses to a different extent by expanding renewable possible consequences for soils and soil energy (see chapter 4). Unfortunately, functions. soils and respective soil functions are as

Table 2.3.1: Important soil functions Linked ecosystem services Linked final ecosystem Soil Functions linked to (Functions prov. by soil (CICES) services ecosystem services. (Source resources) (Benefits humans obtain) (ES the context of expanding RE) GEITNER, Clemens & HASTIK, (Functions prov. by soil (ES the context of (Benefits humans obtain) Richard 2015) resources) t t expanding RE) Lifecycle support and Habitat for flora Habitat for soil organism maintenance, habitat and gene t t and fauna pool protection food Biomass Soil formation, provision of Provision of forest- and production (food, t nutrients materials & energy t agricultural products timber, energy plants) regulation of water and mass Natural hazard Water flow regulation t flows t protection Filtering, buffering Immobilization of waste, Water provision and decompositionof toxics and other nuisances by t t and filtering pollutants ecosystems Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 27 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Renewable energy sources and their relations to soil functions – possible impacts based on expert knowledge and literature review

Table 2.3.2: Renewable Soil as a liveli- Soils as a Soils as an inte- Soils as a charac- Soils as a space energy sources and their hood resource location for gral part of the teristic element for human set- relations to soil functions. and a living agricultural use ecological balance of nature and the tlement (3b) and (mainly water and landscape (1b) other activities (Source: environment including pas- (1a) and as a ture farming nutrient cycles) and as an archive (tourism, trans- GEITNER, Clemens & HASTIK, genetic reser- and forestry (1c) and as filter- of natural history port, commer- Richard 2015) voir (1e) (3a) ing, buffering and and the history of cial usage, etc.) storage medium civilisation (2) (3b/3c) (1d) Loss of soil bio- Loss of soil Soil compaction Soil erosion in Competition for diversity in case nutrients in and humus degra- case of inad- forest resources of inadequate case of full tree dation in case of equate forest with other indus- Forest biomass forest manage- harvesting inadequate forest management tries (e.g. paper or ment management wood processing (e.g. use of heavy industry) harvesters) Loss of soil bio- Soil erosion, Soil erosion, com- Soil loss and loss Competition for diversity in case compaction paction, humus of wetlands in agricultural land of intensified and humus loss and water case of intensified between energy Agricultural agriculture (e.g. loss in case eutrophication in agriculture (e.g. crop cultivation biomass due to pesticide of inadequate case of inade- due to drainage and food produc- use) agriculture quate agriculture of hydromorphic tion management management soils or earth movements) Soil habitat Loss of pro- Soil water balance Depending on indi- Depending on indi- changes (e.g. in ductive land in change due to vidual project (e.g. vidual project and Hydropower run- case of riparian case of inun- inundations and impacts on alluvial possible conflicts of-river forests and flow dations and/or groundwater soils as landscape of use (e.g. with and reservoir alternations) construction alteration close to element and agriculture) measures water reservoirs archive) Regeneration Regeneration Organic mat- None or only Competition for of soil habitats of soil pro- ter enrichment, minor impacts agricultural land due to agricul- ductivity due small-scale are assumed but Photovoltaics ture extensifi- to agriculture changes in water impacts during ground mounted cation extensification budget and in- construction crease of ground- phase are possible water recharge Hydropower drinking water None or only minor impacts are assumed but impacts during construction phase are possible supply Wind power Only minor impacts are assumed (soil sealing) and impacts during construction phase are probable

Photovoltaics None impacts assumed building mounted Soil functions according to the Protocol on the implementation of the Alpine Convention of 1991 in the field of soil conservation, CIPRA 1998: Chapter 1, Article 1, Objective 2, 1-3)

A literature research helped to reveal various habitat function of hydromorphic soils while areas where soil functions can be impact- further impacts strongly depend on the indi- ed by expanding renewable energies (Table vidual project. For other energy sources, soil 2.3.2). In the context of agricultural and for- function impacts can occur primarily during est biomass, a large range of impacts has to the installation phase. be balanced within management plans. For hydropower many impacts are related to the Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 2. Soci a l science a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 28 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. European Environment Agency (2013): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services Version 4.3. from http://cices.eu/. 2. Grunewald, K. & Bastian, O. (Hrsg.) (2013): Ökosystemdienstleistungen. Konzept, Methoden und Fallbeispiele. Berlin, Heidelberg. 3. Haines-Young, R. & M. Potschin (2013): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) - Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003. 4. Hastik, R., Basso, S., Geitner, C., Haida, C., Poljanec, A., Portaccio, A.,Vrscaj, Borut; Walzer, C. (2015): Renewable energies and ecosystem service impacts. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 48, 608-623. 5. Kumar, M., Kumar, P., (2008): Valuation of the ecosystem services: A psycho-cultural perspective. Ecological Economics. 64, 808-819. 6. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005): Ecosystems and human well-being, Island Press Washington, DC. 7. Norgaard, R.B., (2009): Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol. Econ. 69 (6), 1221–1227. 8. Nunes, P.A.L.D., van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. (2001): Economic valuation of biodiversity: Sense or Nonsense? Ecological Economics. 19, 203-222. 9. Sukhdev, P., H. Wittmer, et al. (2010): The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 29 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Photo © KarinPhoto Svadlenak-Gomez ©

Decision support 3 systems

Authors: BERCHTOLD-DOMIG, Markus21; CIOLLI, Marco16; GAREGNANI, Giulia8; ; GERI, Francesco16; GRILLI, Gianluca8; GROS, Julie8; KRALJ, Tomaž2; KRAXNER, Florian10; LEDUC, Sylvain10; POLJANEC, Aleš5; SACCHELLI, Sandro19; SERRANO LEON, Hernan10; VETTORATO, Daniele8; VRŠČAJ, Borut2; ZAMBELLI, Pietro8

“Identifying the “real” potentials for renewable energy in the Alpine Space is a matter of finding an optimal compromise between the right technology/renewable energy type applied to the right place, and at the same time protecting the environment and ecosystem services (considering the various protection zones and levels). Equally important, such measures of optimisation have to be accompanied by corresponding supporting policies (e.g. introduction of tariffs/ appropriate renewable energy subsidies, lifting of fossil fuel subsidies.” (IIASA) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 30 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: The role of social science and decision support systems

Eva-Maria Nordström, PhD, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Question: What is the role of social science understanding of the issue of renewable en- and decision support systems (for stake- ergy and of other stakeholders’ perspectives holders and experts) in land planning and on this issue. Thus, it may assist in defusing renewable energy planning? conflict among stakeholders and facilitate Answer: I think both decision support sys- the implementation of the strategy select- tems and social science are essential for ed in the end. Participation will also bring good planning. Decision support systems multiple perspectives and new information based on sound models and relevant bio- from stakeholders into the process, which

© Mona Bonta Bergman, SLU physical data are needed to help us explore may lead to more innovative and better the consequences of various land manage- strategies from an overall societal point of Eva-Maria Nordström holds a PhD in ment options and define appropriate strat- view. However, a successful participatory Forestry and works at the Depart- egies for the future. For instance, advanced approach is often demanding, both for plan- ment of Forest Resource Manage- ment at the Swedish University of decision support systems have been de- ners and stakeholders. Usually it takes time Agricultural Sciences (SLU). Her re- veloped for forest planning during the last to build trust among stakeholders, to agree search presently focuses on forest 10 years that can help us to analyze com- on objectives and to explore various options. management planning and policy plex problems. However, with increasingly situations with multiple objectives advanced decision support tools the need Question: In your opinion what can be the fu- and involvement of stakeholders. She has expertise in forest decision for social science and “soft methods” also ture development of renewable energy in the support systems, multi-criteria de- grows, at least if we want to avoid a tech- Alps and how can decision support systems cision analysis (MCDA), participatory nocratic and expert-based approach to contribute to it? planning and future studies method- planning. Decision support tools may assist Answer: The future is hard to tell, but I think ologies. in involving stakeholders in the planning but it is likely that we will need to use our nat- interdisciplinary approaches including social ural resources very efficiently in the future science will in many cases be necessary to to support a sustainable development un- be successful. der global climate change. Decision support systems will be essential to explore differ- Question: What might be the strengths and ent options and make sound choices that will weaknesses of a participatory approach for not only optimize the resource use today but development of renewable energy strate- also ensure that we will have different op- gies? tions in the future. Answer: A successful participatory approach will most likely increase the stakeholders’ Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 31 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 3.1 Short general introduction to decision support systems

A decision support system (DSS) is a com- data or database, (2) the model and (3) the puterized tool that helps a user to identify user interface. The user has an important a simple solution to a complex system and role in the overall architecture of the DSS, enforces the decision making process. A DSS and can provide useful feedback regarding has three core components, (1) the input the objectives of the DSS (see Figure 3.1.1).

Figure 3.1.1: Overview of a Decision Support System architecture

The recharge.green project has developed biomass energy use in Maritime Alps four decision support systems. One is dedi- Nature Park (Italy) cated to the Alpine Space developed by the ●● Comparing the potential of different re- International Institute for Applied Systems newable energy sources and assisting Analysis (IIASA), the second one to speci- stakeholders in making land use deci- fied case studies developed by the Europe- sions regarding renewable energies in an Academy of Bozen/Bolzano (EURAC), one Vorarlberg (Austria). for the optimal use of biomass in the Triglav National Park coordinated by the University For each DSS case study a different meth- of Ljubljana, Slovenia, and finally one for the odology was used. The cooperation between implementation of renewable energy sys- the local authorities and/or industries and tems in Leiblachtal, Austria. the project partners played a key role in the successful implementation of the four local The Alpine Space DSS focuses on the whole DSS. This interaction increased the value of Alpine arc and identifies the potential and the DSS with regard to access to more accu- cost of increasing renewable energy produc- rate input data, as well as defining the prob- tion as well as protecting ecosystem servic- lems the region is willing to address for its es such as biodiversity. The development of own renewable energy planning. solar panels, windmills, hydropower stations and combined heat and power plants are the The results of two of the computer based four technologies studied for the Alps. Re- DSS (Alps-wide and Maritime Alps Nature garding the localization of the areas where it Park) were uploaded to a user-friendly inter- is allowed to set up such technologies, their face called JECAMI (www.jecami.eu). The us- number, capacity and location are identified. ers can vary the key parameters (e.g. inten- sity of protection restriction) and see what Besides the Alpine space DSS, other special- would be the consequences, for instance, for ised DSS dedicated to some of the pilot ar- renewable energy potential, production cost eas have been developed to answer specific or emission reductions. This General User questions that are characteristic of each of Interface (GUI) does not allow users to run the case studies. These were designed for any of the DSS themselves, but rather allows the following tasks: them to observe the results from pre-se- ●● Identifying the sustainable use of woody lected scenarios. Users can see the conse- biomass in Triglav National Park (Slove- quences of each parameter and can refer to nia) a detailed manual for further information, ●● Hydropower station development and where all assumptions are listed and de- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 32 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

scribed. The JECAMI interface presents the resources, technologies, environment or lo- results geographically, for the Alps or for the cal policy at a very detailed level increases “zoomed-in” pilot region case studies. the complexity of the system. Therefore it is important to delimit the boundaries of the When establishing a DSS the challenge is to problem. A good integration of the problems collect the largest possible amount of data. and thorough consideration of multiple cri- Interaction with the stakeholders or local teria will lead to more informed and better partners is crucial for the accuracy of the established decisions. The decision resulting input data, and thus the results. The final from the multi-criteria approach is based on users have an important role in interacting the various alternatives for producing a cer- with the developers of the DSS tool in order tain amount of power while balancing renew- to define the purpose and the key questions able energy development and the protection a decision support system has to answer. Ta- of the environment. For each set of param- ble 3.1.1 below presents an overview of the eters, the modelled optimization will lead to key parameters that have been collected for different solutions. From a sample of results the different case studies: from plausible scenarios, the user can then make an educated decision on the optimal The integration of a large amount of input solution that he or she judges least risky or data on a wide spectrum of areas such as most valuable for the region in question.

Table 3.1.1: List of major parameters Category Sub-category Resolution Unit needed for the setup Resources of the DSS. Location of biomass 1*1 km Biomass Biomass available 1*1 km m3/ha Cost of harvest 1*1 km EUR/m3 Solar radiation 1*1 km kWh/km2 Solar Slope 1*1 km degrees Wind Wind speed 1*1 km m/s Precipitation 1*1 km m3/year Height differences 1*1 km m Hydro River map shp file

Pulp and paper mills Exact location m3biomass/year Existing industries Sawmills Exact location m3biomass/year Hydropower stations Exact location MW Road map shp file Railway map shp file Network High voltage power grid map shp file Power stations Exact location Biomass transport EUR/m3 Transportation cost Power distribution EUR/kWh Heat demand Cities PJ/year Demand Power demand Cities MWh/year Reference systems Heat price Cities EUR/MJ Power price Cities EUR/kWh Map of protected areas shp file Protected areas Policy in place per country for each protected area category Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 33 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 3.2 Introduction to strategic environmental assessment

Strategic is an attribute which qualifies The SEA methodology was introduced in ways of thinking, attitudes, actions related 1989 as a voluntary approach in the elabo- to strategies. The Alps need a strategy to ration of development plans. In 2001 an EU balance renewable energy production and Directive (2001/42/EC) enforced the use of ecosystem services preservation. the SEA methodology as a legal procedure in For this reason the recharge.green project the assessment of plans and programmes, adopted the concept of Strategic Environ- which set conditions for certain types of mental Assessment (SEA) as a methodology project development 1. to link the project’s outputs to the decision making processes and development plan- The SEA, which has a legal procedure simi- ning actions in the Alpine territory. lar to the Environmental Impact Assessment SEA relates to highly complex issues, at mul- (EIA), provides a more holistic and com- tiple spatial and temporal scales, engaging a prehensive view of development strategies variety of stakeholders and consequently, (Figure 3.2.1). It may be argued that the en- multiple perspectives and expectations. It is vironmental assessments suitable for poli- a flexible framework of key elements, acting cies, plans and programs of a more strategic strategically in a decision process to enable nature are different from those applicable to a facilitating role, ensuring an added-value individual projects in several important re- to decision-making. spects 3.

Figure 3.2.1: Policies, Voluntarily Flowchart of the relations Plans and Programmes between SEA methodology, EIA and SEA Directive Under (Source: Partidario, 2012) EU Directive

With strategic Strategic Plans and nature Programmes approach to EU Directive SEA

Without strategic nature

EIA-based SEA

The recharge.green project´s objectives tential; nteractions between I were compatible with the SEA procedure and ● Innovation of the population; recharge.green and the ● Directive. The following project objectives ● Promotion of environmental quality, SEA methodology ● are shared with the SEA Directive: landscape and cultural heritage and sustainable use of natural resources. ●● Mitigation against climate change; Some of the recharge.green project´s tech- ●● Enhancement and maintenance of bio- nical outputs were designed to connect to diversity values and human well-being; the SEA methodology. In particular the spa- ●● Social and territorial cohesion; tial Decision Support System (SDSS) called ●● Promotion of regional development po- “r.green” supports the SEA procedure by: Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 34 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

●● Positioning itself flexibly in relation to energy) development towards sustaina- the decision-making process (for re- bility pathways; newable-energy production), ensuring ●● Ensuring active stakeholder engage- strong interaction and frequent itera- ment through dialogue and collaborative tion from earliest decision moments, processes towards conflict reduction and following decision cycles; (between energy production and eco- ●● Integrating relevant biophysical, so- system services preservation) and win- cial, institutional and economic issues, win achievements. keeping a strategic focus on very few, ●● but critical, themes; The interactions between the phases of the ●● Assessing environmental and sustain- SEA and the tools of the r.green SDSS are ex- ability opportunities and risks of stra- plained in Table 3.2.1: tegic options to help drive (renewable

Table 3.2.1: SEA steps SEA outputs R.Green capabilities Interactions between the ● Review of current environmental and social phases of the SEA and the ● conditions and likely changes in these SDSS (Source: IIASA) conditions in the absence of the development ‘plan’ (or development trends) – OPTION ZERO State of the art analysis (do nothing). screening Data collection ●● State of the art analysis for: Stakeholders involvment ∫∫ RE production: current production, maps, potentials, energy plans ∫∫ ESS: values, locations, conflicts ●● Stakeholders involvment: ∫∫ ESS values definition ●● Identification of changes in environmental and social conditions if the proposed plan (or existing trend) is implemented Defines the context, extent, ● Theoretical, legal, technical, reccomended, scoping ● conflicts economic criteria are considered ●● The „impact“ module supports in evaluating multifunctional and corss-cutting issues (soil protection, CO2 emissions, etc..) Scenarios development Stakeholders involvment ●● Scenario development and discussion with local stakeholders; alternatives Alternative comparison; ● Alternative comparison Iteration of modelling ● ●● Iteration of modelling exercise and multicriteria exercise and multicriteria evaluation evaluation ●● Able to update the state of the art during the scenarios implementation ● Incremental construction of the database / Able to update the state of ● update monitor the art during the scenarios ●● Easy reiteration of the modelling exercises to implementation update the SoA ●● Framework and platform for the discussion with key stakeholders

Further Reading 1. Dalal-Clayton B. and Sadler B. (2005): Strategic Environmental Assessment, a sourcebook and reference guide to international experience. London: Earthscan. 2. Pang X, Mortberg U; Brown N (2014): Energy models from a strategic environmental assessment perspective in an EU context-What is missing concerning renewables? RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS Volume: 33 Pages: 353-362 3. Partidário, Maria do Rosário (2012): Strategic Environmental Assessment - Better Practice Guide - Methodological guidance for strategic thinking in SEA. Portuguese Environment Agency and Redes Energéticas Nacionais (REN), SA Lisbon. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 35 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: The use of GIS as a tool for Strategic Environmental Assessment

The use of Geographical Information Sys- ates the energy exploitation by remov- tems (GIS) can be considered at various key ing areas with special protection and by stages of the Strategic Environmental As- computing the surface area of lands vul- sessment (SEA) regarding energy planning. nerable to impacts. Vulnerability maps The use of GIS facilitates the preparation of can be inserted into the model by con- the baseline and helps to illustrate data by sidering levels of protection, ecosystem means of maps. GIS enhances the display of services evaluation, etc. key information related to the location of a ●● Testing scenarios during the planning plan or programme and to the location and process. The test phase and the con- proximity of protected areas, touristic or tinuous assessment of users’ opinions recreational zones and heritage areas. It can and needs were improved thanks to increase the understanding of environmen- the transformation of renewable en- tal and planning considerations. ergy exploitation models into a spatial The SEA practice not only needs a visualis- format. The tool can stress potentially ation tool but also robust spatial data anal- conflicting energy exploitations against ysis. For this reason, the GRASS GIS add-on vulnerability maps and identify potential r.green was developed in a GIS environment. conflicts (e.g. hydropower against agri- The r.green add-on is a set of tools for trans- cultural use of water, energy exploitation forming and analysing spatial data starting against biodiversity or landscape value, from the availability of natural resources. In etc.). Thus the tool facilitates the identi- particular, the r.green set of tools can sup- fication of potential trade-offs and pos- port the SEA at the following stages: sible quantifiable mitigation measures ●● Development of reasonable alterna- (e.g. buffer zones around highly vulner- tives with a series of indicators regard- able areas, minimum distance between ing natural resource exploitation. The plants, decreasing the percentage of integration of the r.green add-on in a GIS prescription for forest biomass, etc.). environment facilitates the spatial rep- The results obtained by a participatory resentation of possible alternatives that approach can then be easily integrated can be compared with the baseline in- into a new scenario. formation and, consequently, evaluated. In conclusion, the GIS environment and the The alternatives can be diverse energy r.green add-on enhance the delivery of in- source uses (wind, solar, forest biomass formation and improve the effectiveness of and hydropower) and different degrees the SEA process with a clearer and more un- of exploitation (only legal and technical derstandable visual communication towards constraints or several sets of “recom- the general public. The tool could also be mendation” measures). used for monitoring energy planning imple- ●● Determination of the cumulative vul- mentation. Of course the information that nerability and the proximity of environ- r.green can provide depends on the availa- mental resources. r.green facilitates a bility of spatial data. The software r.green is more robust spatial analysis that can available as add-on in GRASS (http://grass. be integrated with various datasets. The osgeo.org/grass7/ ) and plugin for QGIS combination or cumulative nature of (www.qgis.org). It works on different Opera- different impacts can consequently be tion Systems (Linux, Windows, Mac). visualized. Furthermore, the tool evalu- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 36 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Aspinall, R., & Pearson, D. (2000): Integrated geographical assessment of environmental condition in water catchments: Linking landscape ecology, environmental modelling and GIS. Journal of Environmental Management, 59(4), 299–319. http://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2000.0372 2. Campo, A. G. D. (2012): GIS in environmental assessment: a review of current issues and future needs. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 14(01), 1250007. http://doi.org/10.1142/S146433321250007X 3. Helbron, H., Schmidt, M., Glasson, J., & Downes, N. (2011): Indicators for strategic environmental assessment in regional land use planning to assess conflicts with adaptation to global climate change. Ecological Indicators, 11(1), 90–95. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.06.016 4. Lee, N., & Walsh, F. (1992): Strategic environmental assessment: an overview. Project Appraisal, 7(3), 126–136. http://doi.org/10.1080/02688867.1992.9726853 5. Mörtberg, U. M., Balfors, B., & Knol, W. C. (2007): Landscape ecological assessment: A tool for integrating biodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 82(4), 457–470. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.01.005 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 37 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 3.3 An Alpine wide DSS model for optimal plant location decisions

The Alpine Space analysis comprises the The production costs of power are deter- whole Alpine arc stretching from the south mined for each energy system, and there- of France up to Vienna and Northern Slo- fore the average power cost in the Alps can venia. The Alpine arc is characterized by a be presented. Emission substitutions from rather low energy demand within the Alps, building new energy systems are calculated but the demand in both power and heat in- the same way. creases drastically right outside the region due to the close vicinity of big cities such as There are restrictions for the setup of the en- Vienna, Zürich, München, Lyon or Milan, to ergy systems and the extraction of biomass. name a few. In order to ensure nature conservation and avoid conflicts regarding the expansion of The Alpine wide DSS approach was devel- renewable energy, the diversity of protected oped by the International Institute for Ap- areas was considered to assess the potential plied Systems Analyses (IIASA), Austria. for renewable energy. Some strict protection The DSS combines information on resourc- categories limit any human use in order to es, engineering, economy, environment and ensure nature conservation. Other models of policies that are all integrated in one model. protection promote a flexible integration of The DSS is based on the existing techno-en- social, economic and environmental objec- gineering model BeWhere (www.iiasa.ac.at/ tives, relying on the interaction between na- bewhere) that identifies the optimal location ture and more or less traditional lifestyles as of renewable energy systems (see Science: a means of achieving nature conservation. The BeWhere model for more details). Many of these areas allow the use of local renewable energy sources that are compatible The model considers both the energy de- with nature conservation objectives, and so mand from the cities within the Alps and serve as model examples of the sustainable the major cities outside the Alps. Heat is integration of local use of renewable energy considered to be delivered to the local com- with safeguarding the ecosystems services. munities within a radius of maximum 25 km around the bioenergy production plant. Pow- However, definitions of protected areas vary er is sent to the power grid if the power lines among countries and even among provinces are located in the vicinity of the production of the same country. Despite similar desig- plants, otherwise the power line can be ex- nations at national level (national parks, na- tended and a power transformation station ture reserves, nature parks, regional parks, can be set up. landscape protection areas, etc.) there is no consistency across countries in the man- For each renewable energy system (i.e. pho- agement objectives within a given protect- tovoltaic solar, windmills, hydropower sta- ed area category. Given the complexity of tions or bioenergy production plants), the protection designations, it was necessary to optimal location is identified based on the harmonize protection constraint assump- minimization of the cost of the supply chain. tions for transboundary decision making. In- The identification of the optimal location creased coherence between protected areas varies a lot from the technical parameters across national boundaries would provide a (setup costs, operation and maintenance better basis for good management practice. costs, overall efficiency) of the energy sys- In an attempt to harmonize the different tems, resource availability (e.g. access to protected area management approaches, biomass and cost of collection), the distri- the International Union for Conservation of bution of power, and environmental con- Nature (IUCN) has provided a global system straints (e.g. restriction on biomass use). of protected area categories (Figure 3.3.1). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 38 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The seven different protected area cate- hierarchy regarding degree of intervention gories (categories I to VII) are based on the or naturalness. This unified system of pro- primary management objectives, although tected area categories is independent from this classification does not imply a simple national designations.

Figure 3.3.1: Overview of the protected areas and IUCN categories (adapted from EEA 2014, UNEP-WCMC 2014b and SIG ALPARC 2013)

Each protected area designation was re- Even with low environmental constraints, it classified for each scenario according to the is assumed that no wind mills and solar pho- different levels of renewable energy produc- tovoltaic plants can be set up above 2,000 tion. See chapter 5 for more details on the m, whereas in a high constraint scenario, it scenarios for protected areas. The protect- is assumed that the same energy systems ed areas are divided into 3 categories: low, cannot be set up above 1,200 m. On the oth- medium and high protection. New energy er side, hydropower stations can either be systems can be set up with some restric- set up in a low protection scenario (except tions within those areas, ranging, for exam- for highly protected areas) or be completely ple, from installation of a small hydropower prohibited in a high protection scenario. Fi- plant in areas with low levels of protection nally, the biomass collected can be harvest- to a total restriction to biomass intake in a ed to a certain threshold in each type of pro- very strictly protected environment. In addi- tected area. The environmental protection tion to protection constraints, the elevation measures are different for each technology is another constraining factor for the setup and for each category of protected area (Ta- of windmills or solar photovoltaic plants. ble 3.3.1). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 39 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Table 3.3.1: Overview of the assumptions Type of protected area None Low Medium High about the level of protected Protection scenario Low High Low High Low High Low High areas for each of the Solar PV 1 0.1 0.05 0.05 0.025 0.05 0 0 0 technologies. Wind mills 1 0.1 0.05 0.05 0 0.05 0 0 0 Hydro power station 2 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Biomass production plants 3 0.75 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.1 0.1 0 1 share of the area that may be dedicated for solar PV or wind mills. 2 0 means no hydro power station should be built, 1 means that a hydro power station may be built. 3 share of the yearly biomass increment used for bioenergy production.

Due to the difficulties non-expert might face up new production plants is competitive when running the existing model, and trying enough when compared to the cost of fos- to correctly interpret the results, the DSS sil fuel based power, new renewable energy is not available online for private use. From systems will be selected. The carbon cost is the huge number of available scenarios, a applied to any emission occurring along the few (the ones differing most from each oth- supply chain. The higher the emission, the er) were selected and their results are pre- higher the cost would be. Regarding pro- sented on the JECAMI interface. The results tection level, a low and a high environmental from the DSS are presented in such a way protection level can be selected. that the user can run the DSS for either one The final results visualized on the JECAMI renewable energy system (i.e. solar photo- interface present the final calculated re- voltaic, wind mills, hydropower stations or newable energy potential, including the the- bioenergy production plants) or for all four oretical, technical, environmental and the renewable energy systems. The user can economic potential. On the JECAMI inter- vary three parameters: (1) the cost of fossil face, different layers can be superimposed fuel, (2) carbon cost, and (3) environmental (e.g. paths of species or occurrence of spe- protection level. The fossil fuel cost is the cies) with the results from the pilot areas or reference system, and if the cost of setting from the Alpine level.

2. Kraxner F, Leduc S, Serrano León H, Garegnani G, Grilli G, Gros J,Sacchelli S, Zambelli P, Ciolli M, Geri F. (2015): Modeling and visualization of optimal locations for renewable energy production in the Alpine Space with a special focus on selected pilot areas. IIASA, Laxenburg. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 40 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: The BeWhere model

The Alpine space DSS was built based on the This location optimization is derived from optimization model BeWhere (www.iiasa. the minimisation of the cost of the supply ac.at/bewhere), developed at the Interna- chain (e.g. in the case of bioenergy, it in- tional Institute for Applied Systems Analysis cludes harvesting of feedstock, transport of (IIASA), Austria. The model is a techno-eco- feedstock to the production plant, process- nomic, geographically explicit model that ing of the feedstock into power and heat, aims at identifying the optimal location and delivery of power and heat to the consumers combination of energy systems in a defined as well as fossil fuel based heat and power region. For the case of the Alpine arc, the delivery) for the welfare of the region studied model optimized the locations of windmill (i.e. the Alps). New production energy sys- parks, solar plants, hydropower stations and tems will be selected once their production bioenergy production plants. The heat and cost is competitive enough against the cost power demand has to be met by the exist- of fossil fuel based power and/or heat (see ing industries, the new optimized production figure 3.3.2). sites, and fossil fuel based heat or power.

Figure 3.3.2 The supply chain studied Existing power Station in the optimisation model BeWhere (Source: IIASA) Power, heat Fossil fuel demand based power Resources New (Solar, wind, hydro, biomass) power Station

Environmental Environmental constraint constraint (biomass use)

The model is dependent of spatially explicit extraction of biomass can be limited, and/or data that have to be as detailed as possible the setup of a renewable energy production for the resources (i.e. solar radiation, wind site can be allowed or not. For example, in a speed, hydropower catchment or biomass core region of a national park, no biomass resources), for the energy demand (e.g. heat can be collected, and no production site can and power) and the logistical infrastructure be set up, whereas in the buffer zones, some (i.e. road and railway networks, power grid biomass can be extracted, and solar panels, and power stations). If the identified loca- but not windmills, can be set up. tion of the renewable energy site is remote, The model keeps track of the costs, emis- an additional power station can be set up sions and the energy quantities of each seg- and the power grid can be extended to that ment of the supply chain. Therefore for each location. An environmental constraint can scenario produced, the renewable energy be added to the above supply chain, both potential, the power production cost and on the resources and the production sides: the emissions avoided can be derived. Those regarding the environmental constraints for three outputs are the final results that are the protection of ecosystem services the provided on the JECAMI interface, as well as Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 41 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

the locations and types of the renewable en- work is formed by the Sites of Community ergy systems. Importance and Special Protection Areas Regarding international protection desig- designated under the Birds and Habitats Di- nations such as UNESCO Sites (Biosphere rectives of the European Union. The main ob- Reserves, World Heritage sites) and the jective of Natura 2000 is the conservation of Natura 2000 network, the relationship with targeted species and habitats of European the IUCN protected areas is not straightfor- interest, which would correspond to the PA ward. For UNESCO Sites, it was assumed that category under IUCN categories I to IV. How- they were assigned a highly protected core ever, the Habitats Directive also provides the zone similar to categories I–IV to ensure the opportunity for area management following long-term conservation of the sites values. sustainable development principles in par- Each core area is surrounded by a sustaina- ticipation with local communities and other ble management buffer zone corresponding stakeholders, which corresponds to the ap- to category V or VI. The Natura 2000 net- proach of the IUCN categories V and VI.

Further Reading 1. Leduc S. (2009): Development of an optimization model for the location of biofuel production plants, PhD Thesis. Luleå University of Technology. 2. Leduc S, Wetterlund E, Dotzauer E, Kindermann G. (2012): CHP or biofuel production in Europe? Energy Procedia 2012;20:40–9. 3. Wetterlund E. (2010): Optimal Localization of Biofuel Production on a European Scale. Laxenburg, Austria: 2010.

3.4 An Alps-wide spatially explicit DSS for assessment and planning of renewable energy potential

The spatially explicit Decision Support Sys- through different levels of energy potential tem (DSS) r.green aims at assessing the re- (theoretical, legal, technical, financial and sidual potential of renewable energy in the recommended) different scenarios can be Alps according to criteria of sustainability compared. The latter aim at helping decision and nature conservation. It creates maps of makers to deal with renewable energy plan- the studied regions that show the potential ning. Indeed, r.green allows identifying the power for each kind of renewable energy ac- energy potential that can be concretely and cording to the chosen level of potential. The sustainably exploited and the most suitable approach is multi-disciplinary. Starting from places for constructing new power plants. the availability of the resources and going

r.green can be used through the Open Source tribute the software to anyone and for any he r green model T . software GRASS (v7) and QGIS (v2.8, more purpose. This choice was made to encour- user-friendly than GRASS), which can be age further development and to spread downloaded for free from the internet. They and share knowledge and science. Indeed, are GIS whose source code is available with r.green is available for everybody download- a license in which the copyright holder pro- ing the corresponding add-on for GRASS or vides the rights to study, change, and dis- plugin for QGIS. In GRASS, r.green is available Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 42 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

by installing the add-on using the command the Plugins tab and install r.green, which is “g.extension r.green” from the GRASS Com- listed there. There are help manuals for each mand Console or Terminal. In QGIS, one has module. to choose “Manage and Install Plugins…” in

Figure 3.4.1: Energy potential Sub-modules of r.green to Legal and/or assess energy potential Theoretical “recomended” Technical Economic (inputs detailed on the left). Theo Theo+L/R Theo+L/R+Tech Theo+L/R+Tech+Eco (Source: EURAC)

Resource Legal values Technical Realizaton availability and/or parameters costs and physical planing and limits and market variables recomended price contrains

r.green is composed of four modules corre- (e.g. high aesthetic value, preservation sponding to the main kinds of renewable en- of ecosystems, etc.). ergy : r.green.wind, r.green.hydro, r.green.so- ●● Technical takes into account technical lar and r.green.biomassfor (forest biomass). limits, among others the compatibility It also includes the module r.green.impact- between potential power and possibil- ess which gives feedback of the impacts on ity to build an accurate system, energy ecosystem services. losses and efficiency of the electro-mechanical system. Each module is composed of five sub-mod- ●● Financial considers the economic di- ules: theoretical, legal, recommended, tech- mensions of the intervention. It provides nical and financial. They calculate energy a financial analysis, calculating realisa- potential taking into consideration different tion costs and profits for each potential levels of analysis, as explained below and plant to assess economic feasibility. in Figure 3.4.1. From theoretical to financial potential, more and more parameters The sub-modules contain required and op- are considered that make the analysis more tional variables. The more complete and precise. accurate the list of provided variables, the more specific and precise are the results. ●● Theoretical calculates the maximum Even if the purpose is the same, these power that could be exploited, consider- sub-modules are really different for each ing only the amount of resources availa- kind of energy. The following paragraphs ex- ble and some physical parameters. plain how the levels of potential (sub-mod- ●● Legal introduces legal constrains de- ules) are defined for each renewable energy rived by plans or guidelines. There is module. The modules for hydropower and already much legislation reducing the forest biomass are in the most advanced potential power in favour of biodiversity stage of development and were applied and conservation. improved in pilot regions. ●● Recommended introduces recommendations that are not legal constrains r.green.hydro considers discharge data but expert or personal opinions on the along the rivers and digital terrain elevation exploitation of a particular area. Some model as main inputs to calculate the theo- areas may be excluded because they retical power potential. Then, providing the should be protected for some reason position of existing plants and protected Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 43 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

areas and information about the legislation, limit). The technical sub-module needs the the sub-module legal calculates the poten- features of the wind-turbine (e.g. rated pow- tial power considering water legislation. It er, rotor diameter, hub height). The other takes into account especially the value of sub-modules again add legal and recom- the minimal flow discharge, which is the re- mended constrains as well as the financial sidual water necessary to preserve ecosys- analysis. tem health. The sub-module recommended allows excluding some area from the anal- r.green.solar considers a thermodynam- ysis, which can be created from points or ic cycle (Shockley-Queisser limit or Carnot only boundaries in an input raster map. The limit) as limit for the theoretical potential. technical part includes the head losses, the A required input of the model is the irradi- efficiencies of the turbine and of the elec- ation map, which can be computed by the tro-mechanical systems. It creates a map sub-module r.sun. The legal sub-module is with the optimal position of the plant(s), based on the European norms (EN 15316- including their potential powers and their 4-6). The technical aspect includes the effi- intakes and restitutions of water. Providing ciency of the solar cells. Different land uses economic parameters, we can then rank the can be considered in r.green.solar.recom- feasibility of the plants on the basis of the mended in order to exclude areas of particu- realisation cost thanks to r.green.hydro.eco- lar interest. Also in this case, the financial nomic. sub-module performs a cost-benefit analysis. r.green.biomassfor calculates the theoretical potential considering the periodic or r.green.impactess estimates the economic yearly forest increment. The legal potential impact of energy withdrawal on select eco- takes into account forestry plans that pre- system services. It considers timber and scribe an ecological availability. Through other wood products, carbon sequestration, r.green.biomassfor.recommended, the user hydrogeological protection and recreation. can choose to define a potential destined The fundamental input of the module is a for civic use or exclude some areas in order vector file with the spatial definition of eco- to create scenarios that modify the level of system services economic values. The mod- protection of the territory. The technical as- ule automatically creates a raster map for pect considers the possibility of extraction each ecosystem service and calculates the based on the level of accurate mechaniza- change of the ecosystem service value con- tion (e.g. cable crane, forwarder). It concerns sidering a percentage of variation. above all road accessibility and slope. The economic sub-module excludes areas where r.green was developed and applied in four there would not be a net profit for the whole pilot areas in the Alps (Figure 3.4.2): Gesso production chain. Moreover, there’s also a and Vermenagna Valleys in the Piedmont re- sub-module called r.green.biomassfor.im- gion (Italy), Mis and Maè Valley in the Veneto

pact, which provides an estimate of CO2 region (Italy) and Triglav National Park (Slo- emissions and other parameters, such as venia). For each region we analysed the most fire risk and recreational value. suitable sources of energy for the territory. The module for forest biomass was applied r.green.wind computes the wind energy in all pilot regions, whereas the one for hy- potential starting from wind distribution dropower was deployed only in the Italian pi- functions and the power curve of available lot regions. The results were discussed and turbines. The theoretical sub-module con- the modules (particularly the recommended siders the maximum limit to the amount of module) improved in focus groups with ex- energy that can be converted in power (Betz perts and local authorities. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 44 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 3.4.2: Localisation of the pilot regions. (1) Gesso and Vermenagna Valleys (Piedmont, Italy) - (2) Mis and Maè Valley (Veneto, Italy) – (3) Maè Valley (Veneto, Italy) – (4) Triglav National Park (Slovenia). (Source: EURAC)

Figure 3.4.3: Results of r.green.hydro. Fin a nc i a l economic (in MWh/year) for forest biomass in the Triglav National Park. (Source: EURAC)

In Figure 3.4.3 the smaller map presents the The JECAMI platform gathers different sce- location of the pilot region, and the larger narios for each pilot region. Through this map summarizes the results for forest bio- user-friendly interface, users can choose mass in Triglav National Park. These results a region and a level of potential (theoreti- were computed by r.green.hydro.economic, cal, legal, technical and financial) and view which has calculated the potential energy the maps with the visualised corresponding (in MWh/year) considering wood prices and power potential. other costs. It only shows the areas with a positive net profit and the legal and technical constraints are also included. The results of the economic module yield more complete scenarios that include the financial feasibility of potential plants. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 45 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Ciolli M, Garegnani G, Geri F, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Poljanec A, Miotello F, Paletto A, Balest J, D’Alonso V, Curetti G, Vettorato D (2015): Applying r.green. biomassfor to Pilot Regions. Energy and nature in the Alps: a balancing recharge.green final conference, Sonthofen, Germany; 05/2015 2. Geri F, Curetti G, Garegnani G, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Paletto A, D’Alonso V, Balest J, Vettorato D, Ciolli M, (2015): A comprehensive process of forest residues energy planning through participation and DSS use in a real case in Piedmont. Conference SISEF (Italian Forest Ecological Society) Firenze, Italy, September 2015 3. Grilli G., Curetti G., De Meo I., Garegnani G., Miotello F., Poljanec A., Vettorato D., Paletto A. (2015): Experts’ perceptions of the effects of forest biomass harvesting on sustainability in the Alpine region. South-East European Forestry 6(1): 77-95. 4. Kraxner F, Leduc S, Serrano León H, Balest J, Garegnani G, Grilli G, Ciolli M, Geri F, Paletto A, Poljanec A, Walzer C. Recommendations and lessons learned for a renewable energy strategy in the Alps. IIASA, Laxenburg, June 2015, ISBN: 978-3-7045-0151-6. 5. Kraxner F, Leduc S, Serrano León H, Garegnani G, Grilli G, Gros J,Sacchelli S, Zambelli P, Ciolli M, Geri F. Modeling and visualization of optimal locations for renewable energy production in the Alpine Space with a special focus on selected pilot areas. IIASA, Laxenburg, June 2015, ISBN: 978-3-7045-0150-9. 6. McIntosh, B. S.; Ascough, J. C., II; Twery, M.; et al. (2011): Environmental decision support systems (EDSS) development - Challenges and best practices ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE Volume: 26 Issue: 12 Pages: 1389-1402 7. Sacchelli S, Zambelli P, Zatelli P, Ciolli M., (2013): - Biomasfor—An open source holistic model for the assessment of sustainable forest bioenergy. iForest, v. 6, (2013), p. 285-293. - URL: http://www.sisef.it/iforest/contents/?id=ifor0897-006

3.5 The DSS biomass-energy- biodiversity-landscape management system (BEBL) in Triglav National Park

Triglav National Park (TNP) is a governmental laced with modest patches of arable land. ackground B – institution responsible for management and The climax vegetation at the high plateau situation and reasons maintenance of the protected area situated of Pokljuka is mixed forest. Agricultural land for DSS development in the core part of the Julian Alps. Among use, a few villages, and isolated farms are a others, the important task of TNP is to con- part of the traditionally managed landscapes trol the sustainability of forest production in the Park and represent its cultural her- systems as well as agricultural production. itage. The mixture of agricultural land and Additionally, TNP is responsible for the main- densely forested areas significantly contrib- tenance of traditional landscapes, natural utes to the diversity of the park. Semi-nat- and cultural heritage and preservation of ural grasslands managed in traditional and scenic values of the park area. The strategic extensive ways are rich in floral vegetation concern in relation to the traditional land- and are of high biodiversity value. In some scapes and diversity is to preserve an ad- places the plateau shows a rough micro-re- equate proportion of agricultural land uses lief. Such areas were cultivated and grazed in the TNP area. The agricultural land uses, in the past (Figure 3.5.1), but nowadays they mainly pastures at high (90 – 1,200 m.a.s.l.) are abandoned due to the inaccessibility for and medium (700 – 900 m.a.s.l.) altitudes as agricultural mechanization. Consequently, well as other types of grassland are inter- spontaneous afforestation is a process that Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 46 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

threatens to change the traditional land- can be used for energy production. scape to forest and decrease the landscape and the (bio)-diversity values of the area. On The main strategy to preserve the tradition- the other hand, the transitional vegetation al landscape and an adequate proportion of of different stages between grasslands and agricultural land uses is to stop the further mature forest shows highly diverse of flora spread of spontaneous afforestation and to as well as fauna. In addition to their biodiver- maintain selected areas in different tran- sity value, bushes and shrubs can represent sitional stages of vegetation. The latter re- an interesting source of woody biomass that quires significant effort and cost.

Figure 3.5.1: Analysis supply of woody biomass from marginal agricultural land on Gorjuše area (TNP) The historical aero photo image from the late fifties (left) was analysed and classified regarding land use (right) (Source: TNP)

The above mentioned processes and goals influences the design of management meas- require a management strategy that will ef- ures is the cost. Management activities have ficiently stop or decrease afforestation, in- to largely pay for themselves and should not crease biodiversity, and preserve traditional require additional financial resources. landscapes. An important consideration that

The land management system that was de- The BEBL management practice keeps such and management for L signed was focused on the production of bio- areas in different development stages of energy production, mass for energy production, to increase and transitional bushy vegetation from its initial biodiversity and landscape maintain the biodiversity of the protected stages to mature bush. Each area is divid- area and to preserve traditional landscapes ed in five to seven sections, of which one is of the Pokljuka plateau. The biomass-en- harvested each year. Within a few years a ergy-biodiversity-landscape management rotation is established that keeps the extent system (further abbreviated as BEBL) aims, of the area stable and in different develop- in the first stage, to identify marginal agri- ment stages. Such areas differ by plant spe- cultural lands (Figure 3.5.2) that cannot be cies and composition, height and density of cultivated with the agricultural machinery the canopy and contribute to the diversity or that are difficult to access. In a second of landscapes. Mature shrubs are a source stage, it is used to assess the suitability of significant quantities of wood biomass, and the sustainability of the system in such which can be harvested, processed to wood areas. In real situations within the TNP area chips and used for energy production. The marginal agricultural lands usually show diversity of such structures is rich in plant a high proportion of surface rockiness or species and has a varied canopy that rep- stoniness, frequently have shallow or acidic resents a habitat for different animals. The soils, or are situated on steep slopes and/or BEBL management practice enables the rough micro relief. Such areas are unsuitable co-existence of biodiversity rich transition- for modern agriculture that fundamentally al vegetation with biomass production. The depends on the use of machinery. Generally, management costs of the BEBL areas are such land is located close to the forest mar- compensated by earnings from woody bio- gins and frequently remote from villages. mass that is harvested for the production of wood pellets. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 47 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 3.5.2: Marginal agricultural land in Triglav National Park (Photo TNP)

The key information that was initially re- on the quantity of woody biomass that can he for T DSS BEBL quired was the extent of marginal agricul- be produced in these areas. The GIS analyses identification and tural areas that are potentially suitable for revealed several areas usually bordering on assessment BEBL management, as well as information forest (e.g. Figure 3.5.3).

Figure 3.5.3: Analysis of the supply of woody biomass from marginal agricultural land in the Gorjuše area (Source: TNP)

To introduce the BEBL management system depth), surface rockiness, surface stoni- he that informs T DSS the area was analysed and evaluated on suit- ness, altitude and derivates of the 12.5 m land use management ability. The core set of information is mainly elevation data (slope, curvatures), a raster- based on land use, relief and soil data. Since ised agricultural land use map (1:5,000) and the large area of TNP has to be frequently expert knowledge-based polygons show- checked for BEBL suitability, a DSS was de- ing areas of marginal agricultural land. The signed and merged with the web-based GIS. model was developed and applied in the Gor- The DSS is based on spatial information con- juše test area, which extends over 718 ha at sisting of raster soil data (soil quality, soil an elevation of 490 to 1,142 m.a.s.l. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 48 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Nr Land use Area (ha) Area (%) ID Name 1954 2015 1954 2015 1 2000 FOREST 413,64 519,8 57,57 72,4 2 1410 OVERGROWING AREAS 4,7 0,7 3 1500 BELTS OF TREES AND BUSHES 8,5 1,2 4 1600 ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL LAND 1,5 0,2 5 1800 MEADOWS WITH TREES 3,4 0,5 SUM 2-5 63,9 18,1 8,9 2,5 6 1100 FIELDS 2,0 0,3 7 1222 EXTENSIVE ORCHARD 4,0 0,6 8 1300 PERMANENT MEADOW 152,2 21,2 9 3000 URBAN AREA 22,1 3,1 10 6000 BARREN LAND WITH GRASSES 0,1 0,0 11 7000 WATER BODIES 0,1 0,0 SUM 6-11 240,9 180,5 33,5 25,1

SUM 718,4 718,4 100,0 100,0

The results of the DSS BEBL model (Figure tionally evaluate the BEBL information with 3.5.4) were integrated into the TNP web GIS, other data collected for management and which enables users to combine and addi- protection of the TNP area.

Figure 3.5.4: The BEBL areas presented by the DSS – Gorjuše test case study. (Source TNP)

Being sub-ordinated to the Slovenian Min- newly developed TNP- recharge.green GIS istry of Environment and Spatial Planning web page (Figure 3.5.5), which builds on the (MESP) and the Ministry for Agriculture, software platform that is used by MAFF and Forestry and Food (MAFF), TNP is in favour other governmental intitutions. of using compatible information systems. That is why the DSS was embedded into a Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 49 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 3.5.5: DSS web GIS of Triglav National Park developed within recharge.green. (Source: TNP)

3.6 The spatially explicit DSS “WISDOM” model in Triglav National Park

Another DSS used by TNP, but for a differ- ●● a minimum spatial unit of analysis at ent purpose, is the WISDOM (Woodfuels In- sub-national level; tegrated Supply/Demand Overview Mapping) ●● a modular, open, and adaptable frame- model. The WISDOM methodology was de- work that integrates information of rel- veloped by the Wood Energy Programme of evance to wood energy from multiple the Food and Agriculture Organization of the sources; and United Nations (FAO) in collaboration with ●● a comprehensive coverage of fuelwood the University of Mexico 5. WISDOM is a spa- resources and demand from different tially-explicit method oriented to support energy users. strategic wood energy planning and policy formulation through the integration and WISDOM is a powerful tool intended also for analysis of existing woodfuel demand and external users such as municipalities, entre- supply-related information and indicators preneurs, and other individuals who want to 2. It allows a holistic vision of the wood en- improve renewable resource management ergy sector. A national-level aggregation of and planning. The basic parameters, which key parameters constitutes the main inputs assist end-users in decision-making, are of the Wood Energy Information System. also published on the Web. Rather than absolute and quantitative data, The WISDOM methodology uses the follow- WISDOM is meant to provide relative/quali- ing steps for data analysis (Figure 3.6.1): tative values such as risk zoning or criticality 1. Setup of a national GIS to integrate all ranking. It highlights, at the highest possible available datasets; spatial detail, the areas deserving attention 2. Preparing a wood energy geo-refer- and, if necessary, additional data collection enced database; needs. WISDOM is based on: 3. Preparing methodologies for the devel- ●● the use of geo-referenced socio-demo- opment of wood energy maps and other graphic and natural resource databases planning tools, using wood energy pro- integrated within a geographical infor- duction and consumption information. mation system; Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 50 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 3.6.1: WISDOM - Wood fuels Integrated Supply/Demand Overview Mapping steps. (Source: University of Ljubljana)

The data needed for the WISDOM method- Balance raster maps between consump- ology are grouped into four sets that cover tion and supply. administration and management, physical 5. PRIORITY AREAS: Woodshed analyses stock (related to the supply of wood fuels), for current biomass consumption, plan- market- and consumption-related data, and ning locations for new plants /distance a market balancing dataset. The first three heating systems, priority areas for new datasets are comprised of recalculated data road infrastructure). collected from the field, while the fourth dataset is derived from comparative anal- All data and results are integrated into an ysis. The data needed to run the model are ArcGIS geodatabase and updated annually. grouped into several modules, The main value of WISDOM as a planning tool lies in its ability to present the results spa- 1. BASIC: Digital elevation model (DEM), tially. Its fine spatial and thematic resolution vector data on administrative units (mu- make it a flexible tool for the representation nicipality borders, provinces), urban ar- of the fuelwood production/consumption eas (spatial extend, population), trans- situation in different locations and, in syn- port infrastructure (roads, railways), thesis, for the definition of priority areas un- etc.; der a wide variety of perspectives. 2. SUPPLY: Data related to potential, di- In Slovenia the WISDOM methodology was vided into direct and indirect sources: introduced in 2004-2005 with FAO assis- Forest supply; total standing volume tance 2. The geostatistical database pro- and increment; annual allowable cut and duced at that time provided the first outlook its structure; standing volume from the of the wood energy sector and its potential agricultural sector, timber residues from in Slovenia. The analysis was carried out at the wood processing industry, import; the most detailed administrative unit level 3. DEMAND: Wood fuel demand/consump- (Kadastral municipality). tion-related data: percentage of house- The upgrade and update of WISDOM Slovenia holds using firewood/wood fuel, esti- (SWEIS - Slovenia Wood Energy Information mated annual consumption of fuel wood System) was carried out in the framework (in households, public and commercial of the IEE Project MAKE-IT-BE, with specific sector), export; reference to the scope of the Work Package 4. INTEGRATION: Data integration - results: 4: Development of supporting tools for bio- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 51 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

energy initiatives. FAO have already prepared new projects to Today the Slovenian Forest Service is in extend this approach to other countries, charge of upgrading and updating SWEIS, such as Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. updating its geo-referenced database by and Macedonia., including new reference data, expanding the The WISDOM methodology is also a suitable study object by including non-wood sources tool for global climate impacts estimations of biomass, and developing the spatial analy- of the use of traditional woodfuels. Further- sis component to allow woodshed analyses 3. more, it can be used to assess the pan-trop- The WISDOM methodology is used in many ical woodfuel supply and demand, to calcu- other countries, provinces and cities all over late the degree to which woodfuel demand the world: Argentina, Brazil, Central Africa exceeds regrowth, and to estimate woodfu- Republic, Chad, Croatia, El Salvador, Italy, el-related greenhouse-gas emissions 1. Kosovo, Mexico, Montenegro, Mozambique, Rwanda, Senegal, Serbia,, Sudan, etc. The

Further Reading 1. Bailis, R., Drigo, R., Ghilardi, A., Masera, O. (2015): The carbon footprint of traditional woodfuels. Nature Climate Change 5, 266–272. 2. Drigo R., Veselič, Ž. (2006): Woodfuel Integrated Supply / Demand Overview Mapping (WISDOM) - Slovenia - Spatial woodfuel production and consumption analysis. FAO Forestry Department – Wood Energy Working Paper. FAO. See: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/j8027e/j8027e00.HTM 3. Drigo R. (2011): Upgraded WISDOM Slovenia as supporting tool for bio-energy initiatives in Slovenia. Consultancy report, Ljubljana, 104 p. 4. Masera, O., Ghilardi, A., Drigo, R., Trossero, M.A. (2006): WISDOM: A GIS-based supply demand mapping tool for woodfuel management. Biomass and Bioenergy 30: 618–637. 5. Project MAKE-IT-BE (IEE/07/722) - Decision making and implementation tools for delivery of local & regional bio-energy chains. Duration: 01/11/2008 to 31/10/2011 6. Project Supply and Utilization of Bioenergy to promote Sustainable Forest Management (TCP/SVN/2901) Duration: 2004-2005.

3.7 A visual DSS approach that captures complexity – the Sample Hectare method in Leiblach, Vorarlberg

The government of Vorarlberg, Austria plans “Sample Hectare” reflects the complexity of ntroduction to the I energy independence by 2050. Therefore renewable energies. It considers the ener- Sample Hectare it is necessary to compare the potentials getic potential of renewables per area com- of different renewable energy sources for bined with the existing use of areas, ecosys- this limited area. “Sample Hectare” assists tem services, and socio-economic aspects. stakeholders in making decisions about the The tool reflects the trade-offs between dif- use of landscape for renewable energies. ferent solutions. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 52 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 3.7.1: Sample Hectare method in Leiblach, Vorarlberg. (Source: Richard Hastik)

Sample hectare 1: Scenario wind: 1 ha forest in remote location energy yield ca. at Hochberg (Pfänderrücken) 300 MWH/ha/a

Sample hectare 2: Scenario ground-mounted 1 ha grassland near settlement photovoltaic: energy yield ca. at Hohenweiler village 400 MWH/ha/a

Sample hectare x: Sample hectare x: further energy description of specific location use scenario

Assessment of actual situation Assessment of new situation of of ecosystem services ecosystem services, added value (by decision makers, for the region, social acceptance experts, population) and energy benefits (by decision makers, experts, population)

The tool “Sample Hectare” was tested by the “Sample Hectare” will continue after the about 50 experts, politicians and local cit- ending of the project recharge.green. izens in the course of three events in the The decision support tool “Sample Hec- years 2013 and 2014. The reference region tare” was developed by Regionalentwicklung was the Leiblachtal in Vorarlberg. Vorarlberg eGen (Markus Berchtold-Domig, The tool which is easy to use provides the Franz Rüf, Peter Steurer, Phillip Meusburg- testing group’s frame of mind within min- er) in co-operation with the University of utes. Further it delivers a contemporary sur- Innsbruck (Clemens Geitner, Richard Hastik) vey of the consulted people’s estimations. during the project recharge.green. The prin- It therefore offers a fruitful contribution to ciples of the tool “Sample Hectare” are being the integration of public interest in spatial presented and explained below. planning processes. The development of

Representative areas of regions with “me- ● Dense settlement area elected ample ● S S dium-value” were selected for a compara- ● Grassland with good yields (slight slope) Hectares ● tive evaluation. Natural monuments, nature ●● Grassland with low yield (steep slope) reserves, biotopes, designated recreation ●● Good accessible Forest areas as well as other protected areas were ●● Bad accessible Forest excluded. As well as: ●● Unused brownfield site (forestation) ●● Mountain plateau with forest and meadow Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 53 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The examination is carried out only for the ● Photovoltaic roof surfaces elected measure ● S - production of energy from renewable sourc- ● Use of grassland to livestock, exploita- scenarios respectively ● es. Due to the relatively low spatial effect tion of liquid manure in biogas forms of renewable energy production the use of air heat, combined heat and power ●● Energy maize and energy grass recovery generation, energy imports were not consid- in biogas plant ered. The Sample Hectare uses the following ●● Open landscape photovoltaic exemplary pattern hectares and scenarios: ●● Planting energy wood ●● Maximizing the timber harvesting ●● Plantation energy wood ●● Construction of wind power plant

Figure 3.7.2: Sample Hectare method: Visual example of different uses. (Source: Regionalentwicklung Vorarlberg eGen)

Each hectare landscape has the potential to The description of the energy output (prima- alculation of the C generate renewable energy. Only the primary energy) per Sample Hectare or the action energy yields per ry energy use is considered in the context scenarios takes place on the basis of exist- Sample Hectareand per measure-scenario of the Sample Hectare and possible double ing energy yield gross, energy production per uses are not observed. The production of scenario gross, input of grey energy (used for electricity is preferred against heat produc- the new production of energy on the sample tion. hectares), energy yield net (the energy yield scenario minus the use of grey energy lead to the actual energy output). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 54 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The pre-selection of the ecosystem services protection; environmental and food safety; election of the S to be evaluated refers to the situation in the water management; and economics, energy ecosystem services to pilot area Vorarlberg and in accordance with and climate protection. be evaluated the criteria related to the production of en- The six selected ecosystem services are as- ergy from renewable energy sources as well sessed in the present and in the potential as their practicability for an assessment. perspective. The final selection was done by the vote of (1) Landscape and recreation, (2) Basis of the regional project team of recharge.green life for water, air, soil, (3) Habitat and diver- as well as the responsible of the state de- sity of plants and animals, (4) Protection partments of planning and building law; agri- against natural hazards, (5) Production of culture; agrarian district authority; forestry, raw materials, (6) Reduction in greenhouse hunting, fishing; nature and environmental gases and global warming.

Each Sample Hectare has an effect on the The following socio-economic integration ocio economic S habitat, the people and the system of habi- factors are considered in Sample Hectare integration to be tat and people. These effects are recorded in evaluated six socio-economic integration factors. 1 Creating win-win situation For the evaluation of local socio-economic 2 Political will and openness of society integration factors the level of individual in- 3 Backup of the local value creation volvement of the test person is relevant. If 4 Security of energy supply the stakeholder is from the site community, 5 Warranty of operation and the assessment based on the community is waste disposal relevant, if the stakeholder is from the re- 6 Meaningful large-scale application gion, where the site is located, the assessment based on the region level is relevant, if the stakeholder is from the province where the site is located, the assessment based on the provincial level is relevant.

Further Reading 1. Musterhektar. Beschreibung der Methode und Anwendung. Regionalentwicklung Vorarlberg eGen, (2015) http://www.heimaten.com/downloads/publikationen/2015 Methode Musterhektar.pdf 2. Amt der Vorarlberger Landesregierung (2010 ): Energiezukunft Vorarlberg – Ergebnisse aus dem Visionsprozess. 3. Amt der Vorarlberger Landesregierung (2011): Schritt für Schritt zur Energieautonomie in Vorarlberg. 101 enkeltaugliche Maßnahmen. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 55 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 3.8 The benefits and drawbacks of DSS

DSS have been used in the recharge.green and scenarios have been used both as a tool project at two main levels, at the Alpine scale to foster discussion, and as a tool to pro- and at the local scale in the pilot areas. Both pose acceptable alternatives. Nevertheless, approaches and scales have provided impor- sometimes printed maps are more com- tant general and numerical, spatially-based municative than scenarios visible only on a results. These results are immediately avail- computer screen, because some of the de- able for spatial planners, decision makers, cision makers and stakeholders may consid- stakeholders, citizens, and scientists via er printed maps more tangible and easier to the JECAMI platform. The use and spread understand. The choice to use one approach of DSS tools in energy planning should be (printed maps) or the other (on-the-fly pro- encouraged, but data availability and quali- jections and scenarios), or both, has to be ty are major issues that must be taken into adapted to the preferences of stakeholders account, since they affect DSS applicability and decision makers and to case-specific and results. conditions. Whichever approach is chosen, DSS are extremely powerful tools that have the introduction of DSS into the planning helped during the project to foster discus- process is definitely positive and helps to sions, highlight conflicts and possible solu- define objectives and to reach a better con- tions. During implementation the DSS pro- sensus among stakeholders. This was true vided results that can be useful to speculate for all the pilot areas, even considering the at an Alps-wide level, or to address political different experiences during recharge.green and planning issues at a sub-national level, implementation. but DSS have also demonstrated their effec- The real applicability of DSS and the quality tiveness at a local level, where they can help that can be obtained from them, however, local planners, decision makers and stake- definitely depends on data availability and holders to identify a path towards sustain- quality. The advantages and disadvantages able solutions. of DSS can be summarised as follows: The ability to create on-the-fly alternatives

The benefits of DSS:

●● DSS may help to support difficult deci- municative and informative projections sions since they can provide a holistic and scenarios, taking advantage of the or at least a broader vision than that of visual approach and of the spatially individual experts. based information. Such visual scenar- ●● DSS are suitable to be used in a partic- ios can easily be examined for errors, ipative process as a tool to incorporate misinterpretations or unrealistic re- the fruits of discussion, but they can sults. also give hints and ideas to refresh and ●● DSS can help to highlight and some- foster discussions. times solve or at least soften conflicts ●● As shown in the recharge.green project, between stakeholders. DSS can give a global and local perspec- ●● DSS are relatively easy to run, and even tive and can support planning at differ- non-specialists can take advantage of ent scales. them (with some limitations highlighted ●● DSS can produce on-the-fly highly com- in the drawback section). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 56 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The drawbacks of DSS

●● DSS need reliable data, following the ●● Even if DSS may be relatively simple to general rule of garbage in garbage out, use, to obtain the best results they must thus data quality must be checked be- be run by experts (or at least with the fore they are run. help of experts) who know what the right ●● Data input may be a painful process, settings are. since data format may appear coher- ●● DSS need computers and, especially if ent but may lack fundamental pieces the amount of data to process is quite of information. Thus metadata (data large, they need highly performing ma- describing the data) are fundamental chines. to put DSS together, and this aspect requires expert knowledge (See Section 3.9 for more on data).

Further Reading Ciolli M, Garegnani G, Geri F, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Poljanec A, Miotello F, Paletto A, Balest J, D’Alonso V, Curetti G, Vettorato D (2015): Applying r.green.biomassfor to Pilot Regions. Energy and nature in the Alps: a balancing recharge.green final conference, Sonthofen, Germany; 05/2015

Garegnani G, Zambelli P, Curetti G, Grilli G, Biscaini S, Sacchelli s, Geri F, Ciolli M & Vettorato D (2015): A decision support system for hydropower production in the Gesso e Vermenagna valleys, e-proceeding, 36th IAHR World Congress, 28 June - 3 July 2015, The Hague, The Netherlands

Geri F, Curetti G, Garegnani G, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Paletto A, D’Alonso V, Balest J, Vettorato D, Ciolli M, (2015): A comprehensive process of forest residues energy planning through participation and DSS use in a real case in Piedmont. Conference SISEF (Italian Forest Ecological Society) Firenze, Italy, September 2015

Leduc S, Kraxner F, Serrano León H, Garegnani G, Walzer C (2015): Energy Modelling on the Alpine Bow. Energy and nature in the Alps: a balancing recharge.green final conference, Sonthofen, Germany; 05/2015

McIntosh, B. S.; Ascough, J. C., II; Twery, M.; et al. (2011): Environmental decision support systems (EDSS) development - Challenges and best practices ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE Volume: 26 Issue: 12 Pages: 1389-1402 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 57 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 3.9 Some notes on data requirements

Decision Support Systems are extremely ef- of 1 km may be sufficient, since results are ficient software applications that can signif- relative approximations. If the calculations icantly contribute to help managers and de- are carried out at a local scale, like a water- cision makers to take decisions in complex shed or a municipality, resolutions of 10 to 1 situations. DSS have been used in different meter are needed to produce more reliable situations with a surprisingly wide field of results. applications, from urban contexts to environment conservation, energy planning, and The recharge.green project worked at two forest management. Nevertheless, one of different scales that represent very diverse the most important issues -which are often perspectives. The first one was at Alpine lev- underestimated - is that the quality of the el with a broader resolution of 1 km, and the results is extremely dependent on the qual- second one at local level for the pilot areas ity of input data. This is particularly true for reaching in some cases a resolution of 5 me- spatially explicit DSS, which rely on spatially ters. based information. It is certainly true that a compromise be- Various factors influence the data quality. tween data quality and processing efficiency Data quality depends primarily on the source is often achieved for a DSS when it comes to of the data. For example in the case of forest choosing scale and resolution of analysis. biomass, this information can be obtained Even if an Alpine DTM at 1 meter resolution from detailed forest management plans were available, it would be very unwise to based on field sampling or derived from re- process the calculations for the entire Alpine mote sensing detection and transformation area at a 1 meter resolution, since there are into biomass using algorithms that calculate many other information uncertainties that quantity rates. Both approaches are valid. limit the general results of DSS modelling The first is generally more accurate, if man- and processing time would be extremely agement plans are redacted professional- long. On the other hand, at local level it would ly. In other situations remote sensing data, be unwise to process data at a 1 km reso- for example from LiDar or high resolution lution, since all the advantages of detailed multi-spectral images can be comparable data sets, including local conditions and pe- to, if not better than, field data. Sometimes culiarities would be lost and results could be remote sensing data are the only availa- too poor to be used at a local level. ble data. Data quality also depends also on the resolution of the information and on Data should always be provided in the best the scale of the analysis. For example Digi- actual available format without transform- tal Terrain Models (DTM) are crucial for cal- ing them. For example, if the original data are culating a set of derived information such in vector, they should be provided in a vector as slope or aspect or basin extension, and format and if original data are in raster they the base resolution of Terrain Model data should be provided in a raster format. Even- strongly affects all derived results. In other tually, the DSS operators will decide how to words, DTM resolution fixes the resolution treat and transform the data. limitation for many analyses. If the original DTM is available at 500 meters resolution, all Data quality also depends on data reliabili- the slope and aspect calculations will be pro- ty. A detailed description of good practices cessed accordingly. This means that all the regarding this can be found on the website terrain discontinuities that are smaller than of INSPIRE (Infrastructure for Spatial Infor- 500 meters (small valleys, small river beds) mation in the European Community) (http:// will be lost. If the calculation is carried out at inspire.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm). a wide scale, for example for a whole country or for the whole Alpine arc, a resolution Nevertheless a short reminder of what is im- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 58 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

portant and must be checked in your data ●● On the geographical side, data must al- before they are given to a DSS could be use- ways be provided with the projection and ful especially if seen in the light of the re- reference system adopted by the cre- charge.green experience: ator. A spatial reference system (SRS) or coordinate reference system (CRS) ●● Data must be consistent in their struc- is a coordinate-based local, regional or ture and should not contain information global system used to locate geograph- repetitions or information encoded in a ical entities. A spatial reference system wrong format. We frequently encoun- defines a specific map projection, as tered data bases containing fields with well as transformations between differ- numerical data encoded as text or text ent spatial reference systems. Providing data mixed with numerical data. Of enor- geographical data without this informa- mous importance in geo-referenced in- tion creates a risk for all data process- formation are primary keys, data base ing and jeopardises result consistency. fields that are crucial to join table values It may also happen that data is created with geographical objects. The fields using peculiar national or regional ref- that can be used as primary keys should erence systems. In this case it might be always be checked for inconsistencies impossible to re-process this data into or repeated values. It helps, in this case, a more commonly used projection if no to archive your data in a Relational Da- specifications are provided. Most GIS tabase Management System, like Ora- easily provide this information in the cle or PostgreSQL, which can manage form of text files; moreover they can this kind of problem respecting the ACID be included in the export data formats, (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, and such as the widely used “shape” .shp file Durability) protocols. format that can store projection and reference system in a file with .prj ex- ●● An essential part of data is metadata, tension. Once the information is stored the information that describes the data. in a .prj file, any kind of GIS is able to re- For example, a detailed database con- trieve these data and, if necessary, to taining many data regarding forest yield transform data coordinates in a differ- or a very detailed 1 meter resolution ent reference system. Thus using sim- DTM have no value if there is no infor- ple but effective precautions it is easy mation on how they were created. Does to provide enough information to allow the forest database or the DTM con- a correct geographical data treatment. tain data from the current year or from twenty years ago? What is the meaning Experience suggests that data must always of some cryptic field names in the forest be re-adjusted and retuned before they can data base? Is forest yield value calculat- run in a model, it does not matter where they ed at a parcel level or at the hectare lev- come from, but if their general structure is el? These are just some of the questions well built and documented through meta- that may arise. Metadata should always data this operation is much easier and more be provided in digital format together effective. The lack of this information gener- with database and geographical infor- ates a painful process of interpretation that mation, but in some cases metadata generally drives the operator to trash the can be provided also in paper format if problematic data and use other, maybe less digital format is lacking. precise but better documented, information instead. ●● If data are provided with field names in original language (German, French, Ital- ian, Slovenian...) a translation of fields name into English should be provided. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 3. Decision support s ys t ems / 59 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading Garegnani G, Geri F, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Paletto A, Curetti G, Ciolli M, Vettorato D, (2015): A new open source DSS for assessment and planning of renewable energy: r.green. proceedings FOSS4G Europe Como 2015 International conference, July 2015 Geomatics Workbooks 12 ISSN 1591-092X http://geomatica.como.polimi.it/workbooks/n12/FOSS4G- eu15_submission_94.pdf

Ciolli M, Garegnani G, Geri F, Zambelli P, Grilli G, Sacchelli S, Poljanec A, Miotello F, Paletto A, Balest J, D’Alonso V, Curetti G, Vettorato D (2015): Applying r.green.biomassfor to Pilot Regions. Energy and nature in the Alps: a balancing recharge.green final conference, Sonthofen, Germany; 05/2015

Sacchelli S, Zambelli P, Zatelli P, Ciolli M., (2013): - Biomasfor—An open source holistic model for the assessment of sustainable forest bioenergy. iForest, v. 6, (2013), p. 285-293. - URL: http://www.sisef.it/iforest/contents/?id=ifor0897-006

Sugumaran R, Degroote J, (2010): Spatial Decision Support Systems: Principles and Practices CRC Press 508 pp Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 60 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Photo © KarinPhoto Svadlenak-Gomez ©

Ecosystem services and 4 biodiversity scenarios

Authors: Authors: GEITNER, Clemens7; HASTIK, Richard7; VRSCAJ, Borut2

“The ecosystem services concept is very important for understanding the entirety of benefits nature provides to humans. We need to recognize that nature and biodiversity protection are crucial for people´s wellbeing. The ecosystem services concept is one way to express this idea. Valuing and mapping both marketable and non-marketable ecosystem services can help to assess the trade-offs between nature conservation and renewable energy production and to undertake effective development strategies. Both monetary and non-monetary evaluation methods are available. However, a context-less use of poorly defined ecosystem service models could blind us to the ecological, economic and political complexities we face and could potentially obfuscate the necessary major institutional changes we must make.” (EURAC, FIWI & UIBK) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 61 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: Renewable energy development in Vorarlberg

Franz Rüf, Regional Development of Vorarlberg

Question: What is the role of social science Question: The application is planned? in renewable energy planning? Answer: Yes. We will apply the Sample Hec- Answer: Science has to communicate the tare tool in the “Energiekonzept Leiblachtal” social benefit of spatial planning and re- (energy concept for Leiblachtal). The energy newable energy planning. Research has to scheme for this region will be an important be based on the feelings, expectations and model for the whole province of Vorarlberg. needs of the residents and society. It is necessary to discuss the different development Question: Why is it important to evaluate scenarios, critical matters, and possible ecosystem services in renewable energy paths towards acceptable solutions. planning? Franz Rüf deals in his professional Answer: Renewable energy is not micro-eco- career with topics of factory planning Question: What are the strengths and weak- nomically justified everywhere. Therefore we and site development. Over the past nesses of a participatory approach? have to bring in welfare arguments as well. 18 years he has been working with his team for the Regional Development Answer: Participation is essential to enable The growing application of public-welfare of Vorarlberg, an association of 50 changes that are broadly accepted. We need balances shows the importance of social municipalities. A key concern for him a change towards sustainability. We must added values. The true values of ecosystem is the careful handling of processes not wait until a catastrophe forces us to act. services must be made more transparent. In in nature and society. Public planning It is crucial that we act with foresight and addition, we should not forget the desire for processes to address the issues of avoid a disaster. self-sufficiency and the need to pay atten- sustainability are in his opinion the foundation for local development tion to social science aspects, not just the work. Question: What about the Sample Hectare natural sciences.. tool? Answer: The Sample Hectare helps us to Question: How can renewable energy be de- understand and communicate the energy veloped in the future in the Alps? resource challenge. It is an instrument that Answer: The Alps have great potential for allows us to compare different scenarios, renewable energy and we should address and different renewable energy sources. The this challenge. With the Sample Hectareap- Sample Hectare helps us to de-emotionalise proach, communities in Vorarlberg can take the debate. A broad application test must be a step forward towards sustainable renewa- the next step. ble energy planning.. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 62 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 4.1 Renewable energy impacts on provisioning services

This chapter first discusses ecosystem ser- ing in a reduction of net primary production), Forest biomass vices impacts caused by expanding renew- these residues are now traditionally left in able energy production (forest biomass, hy- the forest to ensure long term soil fertility. dropower, wind power, solar energy) based Biomass guidelines promote a “sustainable” on the CICES ecosystem services classifi- removal of residues, but the quantification cation (provisioning, regulating and main- of threshold levels is challenging. Various tenance, cultural services). After outlining long-term experiments highlight the impact the main impact dimensions we will develop of residue removal, suggesting subsequent a baseline scenario for renewable energy ex- reductions in forest growth ranging from 5 to pansion and the consequences for ecosys- more than 20 percent. Additionally, pure for- tem services. est monocultures (spruce stands) can have Although the aim of Alpine forest manage- significant adverse effects on soil quality ment strategies is sustainable harvesting, (Figure 4.1.1). These impacts occur particu- the increased use of forest residues for en- larly on shallow soils and/or nutrient-poor ergy generation facilitated by new harvest- soils as well as in specific soil types (e.g. ing machines may create new challenges. Podzols). High fuelwood prices might pro- Soils as three-dimensional components of mote intensified forest management. This ecosystems fulfil various functions, for in- might stimulate pre-commercial thinning of stance as living space, as regulator in water lower quality timber, increasing stand stabil- and element cycles, as reservoir, buffer and/ ity and tree species composition. Impacts on or filter, but also as an archive of natural his- the provision of non-wood forest products, tory and the history of civilization. Given the such as wild plants and wildlife, are more dif- negative outcomes during previous centu- ficult to evaluate as these are strongly reli- ries (e.g. degradation of forest soils result- ant on habitat quality and function.

Figure 4.1.1: Two Alpine soils on the same parent material (carbonate moraine), excavated at the Pokljuka plateau, Slovenia, almost at the same altitude and a few km apart. Podzolised soils under pure spruce stands (left) show strong podsolization processes in comparison to weakly leached Luvisol under pasture (right) (Source: VRŠČAJ, Borut, AIS). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 63 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Hydropower reservoirs are a particular the provision of fresh water. On the other ydropower H source of socio-economic conflicts and hand, hydropower systems can also create conflicts with various provisioning services benefits such as a more constant provision due to a forced shift in land use and subse- of water for irrigation purposes or flood con- quent human and livestock displacements. trol. Furthermore, water diversions can affect

Wind power rarely has an impact on provi- occur at the construction site and in case of ind power W sioning services, as most adjacent areas can additional infrastructure (e.g. construction still be used for agriculture or forestry. Soil of access roads). sealing and a loss of productive land only

Although some concerns have been Soils might even benefit from extensive land olar energy S raised about loss of agricultural land from management regimes, e.g. from addition of ground-mounted photovoltaic systems, organic matter. On the other hand, soil func- modern installations can reduce soil sealing tions might be impacted during the installa- to less than 5% of an area. Furthermore, the tion phase (e.g. reduced water buffer func- remaining areas can still be used for exten- tion due to compaction). sive forms of agriculture, such as grazing.

4.2 Impacts on regulating and maintenance services

The impacts on regulating and maintenance lated to over-extraction of wood but rather orest biomass F services resulting from the intensification of to inadequate rejuvenation and excessive forest management are manifold. Particu- wildlife browsing. Higher prices for forest bi- larly biodiversity impacts are difficult to as- omass can stimulate cost-prohibitive man- sess as some species might benefit from al- agement and consequently improve the pro- tered forest structures while the habitat for tective function of forests. others deteriorates. In general, intensified forest management decreases deadwood Forest soils and the geological setting play ratios or stands of old wood. Deadwood is a key role in water filtration and fresh water an important habitat for fungi, beetles, am- provision as they both depend on physical, phibians, birds or small mammals. In this chemical and biological properties. Wa- context, the monitoring of key species can ter-related ecosystem services may benefit help to estimate biodiversity impacts. On the if an increased use of bioenergy favours a other hand, the removal of old trees and res- shift towards more diverse forests, particu- idues might also decrease the potential for larly more broad-leaved species. Full tree pest infections due to the removal of breed- harvesting has an impact on soils and water ing substrate and help to prevent fire haz- quality through physical soil damage such as ards. compaction and erosion, reduced intercep- tion, infiltration and increased runoff with Natural hazard protection is regarded as augmented turbidity. a key function of Alpine forests. Therefore, forest activities need to be evaluated with Air quality impacts caused by combustion respect to various regulating services such present themselves specifically in the form as protection from avalanches, landslides, of particle matter and NOx. Alpine valleys erosions, mudflows, rock falls or floods. are particularly affected during the winter However, most of the current problems re- months due to increased particle matter garding the protective function are not re- emissions from residential wood burning Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 64 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

while large scale facilities with sophisticated rates of forests. This could be compensat- combustion and filter systems can decrease ed with sound forest and land use manage- air pollution significantly. ment, by balancing long rotation periods aimed at maximising carbon sequestration Last but not least an increased use of forest against short rotation periods targeted at biomass reduces the carbon sequestration biofuel harvesting.

The use of hydropower can result in a loss es) and decrease turbine related mortality ydropower H of biological diversity and create barriers to (intelligent turbine design). The potential fish migration and can also lead to impacts resulting from small hydropower is estimat- on downstream river ecosystems (e.g. altered to be limited while the ecological impacts nation of hydrological cycles, loss of areas can be substantial. Therefore, small hydro- exposed to regular inundation), reservoir power will not be discussed here. impoundments, altered sediment transport Besides these ecological impacts that an patterns and water quality modifications. expansion of hydropower generation entails, The nature and the size of these impacts the consequences for water regulation and depend on management procedures such as flood protection also need to be discussed: maintaining in-stream flow, reducing hydro On the one hand, experience from the past peaking, reservoir management, bed-load decades has demonstrated the ability of management and power plant structures. man-made reservoirs to defuse extreme Recent concerns are particularly related flood events, but on the other hand these to the impacts caused by hydro peaking, a reservoirs can cause additional damage scheme used to provide more flexible energy through mismanagement of water flow and production and thus higher revenues. How- breaching. Besides flood hazard protection, ever, numerous efforts have been under- hydropower reservoirs may be important for taken during the past decades to improve the mitigation of droughts caused by region- upstream fish movement (e.g. fish passag- al climate change in the future.

Impacts of wind mills on wildlife habitats rates associated with wind turbine collisions ind power W can take the form of rotor collisions, dis- are generally lower than other anthropogen- placements due to disturbance, migration ic causes of death, such as collisions with barriers and habitat alterations. However, communication towers, windows, and power impacts on birds and bats vary strongly, de- lines, entanglement in fences, cat predation, pending on site-specific factors (positioning and mortalities related to pesticide use. of power station with respect to topography, Nevertheless, impacts on endangered spe- winds and migration routes), species-species or species with low reproduction rates cific factors, diurnal and seasonal factors may be a matter of serious concern. (yearly migration movements). The death

Ecosystem services impacts associated in ecologically sensitive areas. Avoidances olar energy S with ground mounted photovoltaic arrays by wildlife or bird collisions have not been strongly depend on former land uses. Im- reported, but the fences required around pacts might be positive in the case of selec- ground mounted photovoltaic facilities are a tive agricultural extensification or renatur- potential barrier to the movement of various ation of former military or industrial zones species. while negative impacts are likely to occur Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 65 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

4.3 Impacts on cultural services

Recreational activities in forests have been different forest type successions). Addition- orest biomass F shown to have several positive effects on ally, managed forests are often perceived as human health. There seem to be only a few more attractive than purely natural forests conflicts between recreational and econom- from an aesthetic point of view. Temporary ic forest functions. Moreover, the perception impacts of forest operations might be offset of landscape changes with the development by an increased availability of infrastructure of the vegetation under forest management (roads) for visitors. activities (new formations of open areas,

Historically, hydropower projects have tourism but on lower impact eco-tourism, ydropower H proved a major draw for (mass) tourism in remains uncertain. Conflicts might arise if the Alps due to their “spectacular” infra- hydropower projects affect elements of nat- structure. However, the compatibility of hy- ural or cultural heritage, such as rare land- dropower projects with present-day tourism scape characteristics. strategies, which are not focused on mass

Wind energy potential is particularly high on past experiences) of landscapes have to be ind power W exposed terrain, at higher altitudes and on taken into account. mountain ridges. However, these high-lying The co-benefits arising from combining wind Alpine landscapes are strongly associat- energy and tourism are traditionally referred ed with untouched nature, cultural identity to by wind energy proponents. Besides, nu- and space for recreational activities. Many merous efforts have been made to attenu- parts of the Alpine area are characterised by ate the mechanical noise (e.g. of gear hubs) historic cultural landscapes, a factor which and aerodynamic noise that occurs due to must be considered when implementing wind shearing (low ground wind speed but wind park developments. Therefore, both high wind speeds at hub height). Neverthe- physical/tangible (e.g. lines of sight) and in- less, the acceptance of wind power projects tangible dimensions (e.g. personal attitudes by local residents and visitors is essential for towards the environment, cultural ideals and the future exploitation of wind energy.

In terms of aesthetic impacts, solar ener- landscapes (e.g. sites of cultural or natural olar energy S gy plants are similar to wind power due to heritage) should not be impacted by ground their both physical/tangible and intangi- mounted photovoltaic systems. ble dimensions. Therefore, highly treasured Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 66 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: The importance of considering soils when valuing ecosystem services

Prof. Franco Ajamone Marsan, University of Turin

Question: Soil was considered as an ‘ag- Question: So, the traditional thinking on land ricultural topic’. Such thinking is gradually production is changing? Are these indirect changing especially when ecosystems func- soil ecosystem services in any way in con- tions are discussed. What are the main func- flict to ‘traditional’ land uses such as food tions and services the soil provides within an production or housing? ecosystem? Answer: Pressure is now increasing on the Answer: Soil is a non-renewable ecological provision of indirect services and, for ex- Prof. Dr. Franco AJMONE MARSAN is component that provides food, biomass and ample, the use of land for infrastructures is full professor of agricultural chem- raw materials; it is a platform for human ac- being negatively depicted as land consump- istry at the University of Torino, De- tivities and landscape, and an archive of her- tion. The allocation of energy infrastructures partment of Exploitation and Protec- tion of the Agricultural and Forestry itage, and plays a central role for habitat and (e.g. solar panels, wind turbines) is perceived Resources (Turin, Italy). His main re- gene pools; it stores, filters and transforms as an impact on the aesthetical value of the search interests and teaching sub- many substances, including water, plant nu- landscape, of which the soil is the main com- jects are soil environmental chem- trients and carbon. ponent. istry, soil contamination, soil quality evaluation. He published more than In contrast to air and water the Can we measure ecosystem ser- 100 research and conference papers Question: Question: and supervised a number of MSc and land or soil is a true property, a real estate. vices? What would be a first step to preserve doctoral students. A simple conclusion would be that the eco- indirect soil ecosystem services? system services the soil or land provides are Answer: Along with the political decision, private and can be marketed? better planning instruments are needed that Answer: Historically, the most required can take all the direct and indirect soil eco- among the soil ecosystem services have been system services in consideration. Estimating biomass production –agriculture, forest- or measuring those services is not straight- ry - and platform for human activity. These forward but it is the only way by which the have generated the necessity of imposing a provision of services can be optimized while right of property on the soil, except for lim- minimizing the impact on the soil resource”. ited experiments of common management of the land. However, while concrete services can be private, there are a number of indirect ecosystem services that are of general, common importance, such as landscaping or

regulating CO2 emissions. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 67 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 4.4 Scenario discussion

Conservation strategies do not necessar- against local nature protection require- ily have to imply trade-offs between eco- ments, which are particularly important in system services and economic interests. biodiversity hot spots such as the Alps. Fur- Both the negative impacts and the positive thermore, industrial landscapes and energy co-benefits need to be balanced against production need to be balanced against the each other and scrutinised in order to dis- need for “pristine” mountain environments. cover the endogenous development strat- However, tourism and energy generation can egies that are particularly important for also create co-benefits, depending on the Alpine regions. However, most of these im- project in question and the tourism strate- pacts depend on particular management gies applied. Natural hazard protection, cru- regimes and additional measures. It is thus cial in areas of extreme topography, can be not possible to view these impacts a priori as impacted both positively and negatively by positive or negative. Nevertheless, it is pos- expanding renewable energy generation for sible to highlight major conflicts and their local settlement areas (roof-mounted pho- dimensions that require trade-off decisions tovoltaic systems, near-surface geothermal as described in Table 4.4.1. Global climate energy), which are generally of less concern change mitigating goals need to be balanced from an environmental point of view.

Table 4.4.1: Provisioning Services Regulating and Maintenance Services Cultural Services Main ecosystem services Provision of Recreational Water Natural forest-/ Climate Habitat for flora and impact dimensions for provision hazard agricultural regulation and fauna aesthetic and filtering protection different types of products values renewable energy. Impacts on Impacts in Trade-off between Loss of natural Benefits or Temporary (Dark green = forest case of the replacement forests, habitat negative impacts related products and soil inadequate of fossil energies disturbances, impacts to main impacts, productivity, management and changed reduced dead depending on logging activities, light green= wood forest carbon wood values forest man- long term competition sequestration rate agement benefits

further impacts, Forest biomass with industry of infrastructure grey = loss of Only minor Impacts in case of Riverline altera- Positive and Positive and side aspects) productive impacts for inappropriate tion, negative negative impacts land possible human use land-use changes limitation of impacts depending on (Source UIBK) assumed migratory routes, depending on side-measure- downstream side-measurements

Hydropower run-of-river impacts, collisions ments Loss of po- Changed water Impacts In case of Habitat loss Reservoirs can Positive and ductlve availability in inappropriate through help to defuse negative impacts land possible case land-use changes inundation, extreme flood depending on of derivations, temperature events side-measure- mitigate of shifts, introduc- ments droughts tion

Hydropower reservoir possible of species None or only None or only None or only None or only None or only None or only minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts assumed assumed assumed assumed assumed assumed Hydropower drinking supply water

None or only None or only Impacts in case of Alternation of None or only Visual impacts on minor impacts minor impacts inappropriate habitats/ minor impacts landscape assumed assumed land-use changes migratory assumed composition, routes of emission of birds and bats, noise/flicker

Wind power collisions effects Competition for None or only Impacts in case of Only minor None or only Visual impacts on agricultural minor impacts inappropriate impacts assumed, minor impacts landscape products assumed land-use changes avoidance of assumed composition possible important habitats

PY ground mounted required None or only None or only None or only None or only None or only Only minor im· minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts minor impacts pacts assumed in assumed assumed assumed assumed assumed case of natural and cultural

PVbuilding mounted heritage sites Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 68 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Based on these insights, we assumed the following constraints (based on ecosystem service constraints) for a baseline scenario for an expansion of renewable energy generation in the Alps:

An intensive use of forest biomass might available for Austria we assume that half of orest biomass F result in a deterioration of biodiversity, for the industrial wood can be acquired for ener- baseline scenario for instance due to reduced deadwood levels. gy production. Furthermore, natural hazard ecosystem service constraints Therefore, we assume a reduced usage rate protection is regarded as a key function of of 70% in protected forest areas. Besides many Alpine forests requiring adapted forest habitat and biodiversity impacts, an in- management strategies. Therefore, only 33 creased usage of forest biomass for energy percent of the natural regrowth rate is used generation might result in resource com- in hazard protection forests. Finally, we as- petition with wood-processing industries. sume that most forest residues are left in However, optimised cascade use can help place to ensure long term soil fertility. to reduce resource conflicts. Based on data

For the sample plot analysis discussed in the existing river courses. Therefore, the theo- ydropower baseline H next chapter we assume, based on the Water retical potential assumed for the Alpine area scenario for ecosystem Framework Directive, that new hydropower of 180 TWh per year needs to be reduced by service constraints plants cannot be installed in protected riv- 35TWh. er basin areas and should not deteriorate

To preserve important habitats and cultural settlement areas. Additionally, wind ener- ind power baseline W landscapes we assume that no wind energy gy is not used in high-lying and as yet un- scenario for ecosystem is used within 1 km of protected areas and touched Alpine areas above 2500m. service constraints

Many Alpine regions strongly limit the use ing-mounted photovoltaic systems which hotovoltaic baseline P of ground-mounted solar energy systems are mainly limited by technical and economic scenario for ecosystem but promote building-mounted solar ener- constraints rather than ecosystem service service constraints gy systems. Therefore, we focus on build- impacts. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 4. Ecos ys t em ser v ices a nd biodi v ersi t y scen a rios / 69 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 4.4.2: Possible Ecosystem Energy Services impacts and Assumed energy potential reductions Ecosystem service impacts source resource competitions and resource competition of selected renewable Exclusion of protected natural forests, usage rate Impacts on natural habitats reduced by 30 % in other protected areas energy sources (Source: UIBK) Impacts on the provision Limited proportion of fuel wood (40 %) besides of other forest products, timber wood and wood used in industries (60 competition for wood resources %), 50 % of industrial wood available for energy Forest with other industries generation due to use cascades (residues and waste) biomass Impacted hazard protection function of forests Strongly limited harvest rate (33%) in hazard protection forests Impacts on soil productivity Retention of harvest residues (17 %) in forests Source: (Hofer & Altwegg 2007, Österreichischer Biomasse-Verband 2013, Katzensteiner & Nemestothy 2007) Impacts on habitat function Hydro- of aquatic and river adjacent Exclusion of protected and remaining natural river power ecosystems, recreational use of courses. (Potential reduction: approx. 20%) rivers and adjacent areas Exclusion of nature conservation zones, exclusion of habitat areas and migration routes of Impacts on endangered bird endangered bird and bat species with a minimum and bat populations buffer distance (1 km) Wind Visual impact on landscape Exclusion of other protected areas, minimum energy aesthetics distance to settlements (1 km), maximum height of 2500 m (pristine high Alpine areas), maximum distance to existing road infrastructure (500 m) Source: (Regio Energy 2015, Suisse Eole 2015) (Temporal) loss of productive Solar Focus on building-mounted solar energy, land or potential settlement limitation of ground-mounted solar energy energy areas, visual impacts Habitat and water quality impacts of intensive Limited proportion of energy crops Biogas agriculture, competition with (max. 10 %) food production

Further Reading 1. Baruck, J., O. Nestroy, G. Sartori, D. Baize, R. Traidl, B. Vrščaj, E. Bräm, F. E. Gruber, K. Heinrich, and C. Geitner. (2015): Soil Classification and Mapping in the Alps: The Current State and Future Challenges. Geoderma. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.08.005. 2. Burkhard, B., F. Kroll, et al. (2009): Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services–a concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape online 15(1): 22. 3. de Groot, R. (2006): Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes. Land- scape and Urban Planning 75(3–4): 175-186. 4. Fisher, B., R. K. Turner, et al. (2009): Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics 68(3): 643-653. 5. Fu, B.-J., C.-H. Su, et al. (2011): Double counting in ecosystem services valuation: causes and countermeasures. Ecological Research 26(1): 1-14. 6. Haslmayr, H.-P., C. Geitner, G. Sutor, A. Knoll, and A. Baumgarten. (2015): Soil Function Evaluation in Austria — Development, Concepts and Examples. Geoderma. doi:10.1016/j. geoderma.2015.09.023. 7. Rodríguez, J.P., Beard, T.D.,Jr., Bennet, E.M., Cumming, G.S., Cork, S.J., Agard, J., Dobson, A.P. & Peterson, G.D. (2006): Trade-offs across Space, Time, and Ecosystem Services, Research, part of a Special Feature on Scenarios of global ecosystem services. Ecology and Society 11(1): 28 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 70 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Photo Alessandro © Gambaro Renewable energy 5 exploitation and ecosystem services: Alpine region and pilot area analysis

Authors: BALEST, Jessica8; BERTIN, Simone15; CIOLLI, Marco16; GAREGNANI, Giulia8; GRILLI, Gianluca8; HAIMERL, Gerhard4; KRAXNER, Florian10; KUENZER, Nina20; LEDUC, Sylvain10; MIOTELLO, Francesca15; PALETTO, Alessandro17; PETRINJAK, Alenka14; PISKE, Rok13; POLJANEC, Aleš5; PORTACCIO, Alessia18; SERRANO LEON, SIMONČIČ, Tina5; Hernan10; ZANGRANDO, Erica15; ZAMBELLI, Pietro8

“In pilot areas, the exploitation of renewable energy should involve local people, assuring that they share decisions in energy planning. The successful integration of participatory principles into decision-making processes necessitates a willingness to make real use of stakeholder contributions. The proper recognition of contributions from the participatory process (solutions, opinions, knowledge) in decision-making can help to reduce conflicts. Alpine residents must be given a stronger role in the management and use of renewable resources of their home region.” (Veneto & FIWI) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 71 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.1 The recharge.green approach: results and best practices

When identifying the sustainable potential duction or higher compatibility levels with cenarios on the S for renewable energy in the Alps, protected conservation management objectives (Fig- protected areas areas need to be considered to ensure na- ure 5.1.1, left). Under a less restrictive sce- ture conservation and avoid conflicts that nario, the potential area for renewable ener- might arise from the expansion of renew- gy production increases significantly. In this able energy production. Three scenarios reduced scenario a high proportion of the were created, with different limitations and protected area is considered suitable for re- access to protected areas according to the newable energy production. Categories I-IV methodology described in chapter 5. Under are maintained as strictly protected areas. the general levels of protection assumed Inner zoning, where small-scale renewable (Figure 5.1.1, centre), the available area for energy production is considered to some renewable energy production is considerably extent to support compatible tourism, is as- limited given the high constraints applicable sumed for the categories II (National Parks) in strictly protected areas and the margin- and IV (Habitat Management Areas). In ad- al levels of production to be achieved in less dition, the assumption of no restrictions on strictly protected areas. Another scenario renewable energy production at Natura 2000 considers a context with greater emphasis sites reduces the conservation constraints on renewable energy production, assuming in large areas. lower restrictions on renewable energy pro-

Under an increased level of protection sce- Figure 5.1.1: nario (Figure 5.1.1, right), high restrictions Spatial distribution of the on renewable energy production and lower protection constraints for compatibility levels with the conservation the potential production management objectives were assumed. A of renewable energy focus on the strict conservation of hab- considering an increased itats and species in the area of the Natura protection level (Source: 2000 sites significantly reduced the area for IIASA). compatible renewable energy production. Furthermore, the potential area for renewable energy production without restrictions is considerably smaller when assuming an external buffer zone for the strict categories I-IV in order to ensure the protection of whole ecosystem processes. From these scenarios, we can see the importance of defining management objectives for each individual protected area. Large differences in the potential area for renewable energy production depend on management considerations. It is important to note the potential role that the Natura 2000 network has in the extension of the biodiversity conservation area and the limitations to the potential area for renewable energy production. Nevertheless, the actual management of these sites differs between regions. Therefore, the focus on biodiversity conservation or sustainable development would depend on a particular area. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 72 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The location of wind mills on crests or on some disparities between countries, with ind power potential W mountainous plateaus is a very sensitive France having very limited wind power de- topic for local communities and power man- velopment (the potential in protected areas ufacturers. Figure 5.1.2 presents aggregat- covers more than two thirds of the total po- ed results for a theoretical potential. It is of tential) compared to Austria, where one third interest to note that the potential is divided of the potential is to be found in protected by a factor of two if the protected areas are areas. Moreover, the potential for wind power excluded from the set-up of windmills. Nev- generation outside protected areas is mainly ertheless, it should be noted that there are found at relatively low altitudes.

Figure 5.1.2: Profile of the theoretical cumulative wind power potential with regard to elevation for the countries of the Alpine Space and the Alps as a whole. (Source: IIASA) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 73 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The protected areas are classified into dif- in some areas, but it has to be noted that a ferent categories (i.e. UNESCO World Her- fourth of the total theoretical potential in itage, UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, Nature the Alps is covered within the Natura 2000 Reserve, National Park, Regional Park, Par- category (see Figure 5.1.3) for both wind and ticular Protection and Natura 2000). Each of solar power production. the categories may overlap with each other

Figure 5.1.3: Theoretical wind (left) and solar (right) power potential in the Alps by country and type of protected area, energy potential data provided by EURAC. (Source: IIASA) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 74 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The potential of hydropower was investigat- ment where a hydropower station is already ydropower stations H ed through an analysis of the potential of the up and running. Figure 5.1.4 presents the catchments. The potential of each catch- theoretical hydropower potential in the Alps ment was determined by EURAC. Starting without constraints, without existing power with the full potential, it is assumed that no stations and without protected areas. hydropower plant can be set up in a catch-

Figure 5.1.4: Hydropower potential of each catchment: left, full theoretical potential. Middle, theoretical potential without catchments with hydropower plants. Right, theoretical potential without existing stations and outside protected areas. (Source: IIASA) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 75 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

A DSS was applied to identify the econom- and optimisation, most of the plants are lo- ic potential of hydropower plants. A busi- cated in protected areas. Assuming a strict ness-as-usual scenario would contribute to regime of environmental conservation, the increasing the capacity of hydropower sta- power generated by the hydropower stations tions by 10% up from the actual capacity, would increase the Alpine power capacity by with new power stations being set up across some 10%. the Alps. With a view to cost minimisation

Figure 5.1.5: Optimal location of hydropower plants in the Alps (left) following a business-as-usual scenario and aggregated power generation by country (right). (Source: IIASA)

It is assumed that woody biomass is used with a high, medium or low level of protec- ioenergy B for power and heat purposes. It is shipped tion. Figure 5.1.6 presents how restrictions mainly by truck and additional power and on the collection of biomass from protect- production plants can be built either in- or ed areas would impact the power and heat outside the Alps where the heat demand is potential under two different fossil fuel price suitable for large facilities. residual heat scenarios. Under the first scenario (low fos- is assumed to be delivered to local district sil fuel cost) a potential of 6.8 and 4.1 TWh/a heating systems, which brings extra income would be reached for a low and high level of for the production plants, avoids spillover of environmental restrictions respectively and valuable energy commodities and increases under the second scenario (high fossil fuel fossil fuel substitutions. From all protected cost) a potential of 8.8 and 5.6 TWh/a for a areas biomass can be selected with some low and high level of environmental restric- restrictions regarding whether it is an area tions respectively.

Figure 5.1.6: Overview of biomass used for power and heat production under 4 scenarios: (1) low fossil fuel cost and no environmental restrictions, (2) low fossil fuel cost and a high level of environmental restrictions, (3) high fossil fuel cost and a low level of environmental restrictions, (4) high fossil fuel cost and a high level of environmental restrictions. (Source: IIASA) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 76 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The model was also set up to identify an a subsidy. The cost is also impacted by the ombining the C optimal mix of renewable energy produc- limitations on the use of the protected area. technologies tion in the Alps which takes the protection Assuming the same policy remains in place of the environment into consideration. Two and the production levels remain the same, scenarios have been developed, a low pro- the production cost would increase by a fac- tection scenario and a high protection sce- tor 3. Figure 5.1.7 presents an overview of nario (see chapter 5). The protection con- both the potential and the cost when fossil straints of course have some impact on the fuel prices rise (costs being the main driver final potential, which drops by a factor of 4 of the decision-making process for the im- to 6 depending on the policy in place (factor plementation of renewable energy systems). of the fossil fuel that can be interpreted as

Figure 5.1.7: Potential and cost of renewable energy production in the Alps. (Source: IIASA)

Further Reading 1. Kraxner F, Leduc S, Serrano León H, Balest J, Garegnani G, Grilli G, Ciolli M, Geri F, Paletto A, Poljanec A, Walzer C. (2015): Recommendations and lessons learned for a renewable energy strategy in the Alps. IIASA, Laxenburg, June 2015, ISBN: 978-3-7045-0151-6. 2. Kraxner F, Leduc S, Serrano León H, Garegnani G, Grilli G, Gros J,Sacchelli S, Zambelli P, Ciolli M, Geri F. (2015): Modeling and visualization of optimal locations for renewable energy production in the Alpine Space with a special focus on selected pilot areas. IIASA, Laxenburg, June 2015, ISBN: 978-3-7045-0150-9. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 77 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: Alpine Convention: towards “Renewable Alps”

Markus Reiterer, Secretary General of the Alpine Convention

Question: What role would the Alpine Con- Question: How can the Alpine Convention vention like to play in increasing the produc- help to pave the way for a progressive ‘re- tion and use of renewable energies under newable energy vision’? a potential energy transition (“Energie- Answer: In the years 2013 and 2014, ex- wende”)? perts from the Contracting Parties and from Answer: The environmentally sound devel- the Observers met in order to determine a opment of renewable energies is very im- “Renewable Alps” vision and collected in- portant in terms of climate change mitiga- formation and data on the current status of tion. The Alps are affected by European and energy development in the Alps – in terms national polices and targets. In an overall of production, consumption and networks. Markus Reiterer has been Secretary approach towards energy efficiency and Currently a report on progress towards the General of the Alpine Convention a decrease in the use of energy, the Alpine Renewable Alps vision is under preparation. since 1 July 2013. He is an Austrian Convention with its energy protocol and cli- The German Presidency has launched initi- diplomat and lawyer. During his term of office he is putting special empha- mate action plan supports the development atives for energy efficiency and renewable sis on promoting and implementing of renewable energies and emphasises the energy generation that are compatible with the Alpine Convention on internation- necessity of ensuring the compatibility of nature and landscape protection. The Al- al, European, national, regional and this development with nature and landscape pine Convention is also supporting initiatives local level. He strives to build good protection. from Contracting Parties such as the Con- cooperation and partnerships with structive Alps Prize awarded by Switzerland the regions, local communities and civil society organisations. Question: What are the strengths and weak- and Liechtenstein. nesses of a participatory approach towards the development of renewable energy? Question: In your opinion, what will be the Answer: One of the main issues is how com- future of renewable energy development in patibility of renewable energy development the Alps? with nature and landscape protection can be Answer: I really think the Alps can be a lab- achieved and how, more generally, competi- oratory for more sustainable and effective tion over land use can be dealt with. This can energy production and consumption. Sub- only be addressed with planning and partic- stantial Alpine experience can be shared ipatory instruments. Of course, sometimes between the different Alpine regions and time and persuasions are needed, but only in countries and be a motivation for collective this way can the various projects be effec- improvements. tively balanced. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 78 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.2 The decision support system and the participatory approach in the Mis and Maè Valleys

The Mis and Maè Valleys are the two pilot ar- Sospirolo and Gosaldo municipalities with eas in the Veneto Region, in the Province of a total of nearly 4000 inhabitants in 2009, Belluno, and they are representative of the and is characterised by small villages in the Italian south-eastern part of the Alps. They northern and southern part. The central part are covered by Natura 2000 Network and has been abandoned, partly because of the Dolomiti Unesco sites. Both of the two areas creation of the artificial Mis Lake in 1962, are characterised by the presence of small partly because of the great flood events in local communities that manage forests and 1966, and now it off the electric grid. The pastures collectively. Like most of the prov- lake is used for hydropower generation but ince of Belluno, both areas have experienced also for the irrigation of the plains. This cen- depopulation in recent years. tral part is also part of the Dolomiti National The Mis Valley (Figure 5.2.1) covers an area Park, as it has interesting geological and bo- of 11,800 hectares and is crossed by the Mis tanical features. Stream, which is 22 km long. It includes the

Figure 5.2.1: The Mis Valley boasts great landscape beauty and many streams and lakes (Photo © Regione Veneto - Mis Valley)

The Maè Valley (Figure 5.2.2) is an area of winter and summer tourism. In former times 23,300 hectares around the Maè Stream it was characterised by traditional use of (33 km long). It includes the municipalities wood for rural building structures, which has of Longarone, Forno di Zoldo, Zoldo Alto and now strongly declined; nowadays a consid- Zoppè di Cadore (with a total of 7974 inhab- erable amount of wood is still being used for itants in 2009). The valley is important for traditional household heating purposes. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 79 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.2.2: The Maè Valley is popular with tourists for its scenic beauty ( Photo © Regione Veneto - Maè Valley)

Figure 5.2.3: Potential for further Potential further development of renewable energies in Mis Valley 5 renewable energy 4,5 development in the Mis 4 and Maè Valleys 3,5 (Source: EURAC) 3 very high 2,5 high 2 low 1,5 very low Number of experts 1 0,5 0 Solar Wind Forest biomass Hydropower > 1MW Hydrop. < 1MW Renewable energy

Potential further development of renewable energies in Maè Valley 4,5

3,5 3

2,5 very high high 2 low 1,5

Number of experts very low 1 0,5 0 Solar Wind Forest biomass Hydropower > 1MW Hydrop. < 1MW Renewable energy Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 80 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Concerning hydropower, the majority of ex- Particular attention was given to forest bio- perts underlined that small and large power mass. Experts argued that it could represent plants exist already, with licensing schemes a possible alternative as a source of energy for the small ones, so a further development that would also guarantee the conservation of this source of energy is not an option. of open areas such as pastures and mead- Especially for the Maè Valley, experts have ows which, in the last decades, have been suggested some “limitations” on new power subjected to spontaneous afforestation, plants, for example regarding the maximum causing problems such as loss of landscape distance between intake and restitution. On variety, fires, tick abundance and so on. The the other hand, the Mis Valley has recent- use of forest biomass for energy produc- ly been affected by a judgement (Corte di tion is considered important also from an Cassazione a Sezioni Unite, n. 19389/2012) economic point of view: it can represent an regarding an authorisation granted for a hy- opportunity to recover the local tradition of dropower plant inside the Park area. For this wood cutting, and also be a benefit for land- reason, the experts have been more careful scapes – in terms of the management of for- with their statements regarding this energy ests and open spaces – and, consequently, source, and have suggested less “invasive” for tourism. solutions such as hydropower on existing check dams or aqueducts. The DSS r.green was tested in the two valleys for hydropower and forest biomass. Regarding the social and economic aspects evaluated in the questionnaire, the experts The following parameters were used in the underlined how small hydropower could rep- model to produce the first results. Scenar- resent a possible source of development for ios were hypothesised, together with inputs local economies by providing financial sup- from experts. port to local communities and through their own involvement with the companies that manage the plants.

● Minimum environmental flow, calculated ● Buffer of 300 m from the Park area. Small hydropower ● ● with a formula determined by the Ba- ●● Technical aspects of turbine efficiency. sin Authority. This formula uses a pre- ●● Existing hydropower plants (for the Maè scribed value for a specific discharge for Valley also the position of small hydro- some specific segments of the streams: power plants under a licensing scheme this value is used as a basis to calculate was considered). the stream’s discharge (no direct continuous measurements of the natural discharge are available for the two pilot areas).

Scenario determined ●● Buffer of 300 m from the Park area. ●● Minimum distance between restitution by the following ●● Maximum distance between the intake and intake of the next power plant: 200 m parameters and restitution of a power plant: 100 m.

● Forest plans: for the Mis Valley, only the ● Increment and yield data from the forest orest biomass ● ● F municipality of Gosaldo has a plan; on plans. the other hand, all the municipalities of ●● Mechanisation levels for extraction. the Maè Valley have a forest plan. Com- ●● Costs. partments with a productive function are ●● Collective ownerships. considered in the model. ●● •Evaluation of CO2 savings. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 81 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

For forest biomass, some scenarios were thetical plants (Figure 5.2.4). analysed with respect to the existing power plants in both areas (one in the Mis Valley in The results were discussed with the stake- Sospirolo, and one in the Maè Valley in Zoppè holders during roundtable discussions. di Cadore) and with respect to some hypo-

Figure 5.2.4: Map of forest biomass energy potential Fin a nc i a l in the Maè valley (Source: University of Trento) Forest biomass energy potential

An important step was made with the partic- and wood, as the experiences and knowledge ipatory approach, developed with local com- of residents helped to produce more realistic munities. The methodology is summarised in and detailed maps, which were initially only chapter 2.1. based on scientific data. At the same time, the stakeholder dialogue provided an oppor- The participation of local people (see Table tunity to collect suggestions and comments 5.2.1) was useful for evaluating some of the on the results of the DSS and on resource ecosystem services that are related to water management in general in the two areas.

Table 5.2.1: Local stakeholder Focus Group Category participation in focus group Local administration discussions Mis valley Environmental associations Tot. number of participants Local Associations to the meetings: 30 Sport and recreational associations Other associations Local administration Maè valley Collective ownership “Regole” Tot. number of participants Environmental associations to the meetings: 38 Sport and recreational associations Citizens The main results from this participatory approach are summarised below. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 82 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The stakeholder discussion provided inter- from an evaluation of the average annual uggestions 1. S esting suggestions and adjustments of the amount of electricity potentially required by implemented in the first results from r.green and the hypothe- the “info point” (about 10 kW), the analysis DSS r.green sised scenarios. was focused on a stream near the Mis lake where a small hydropower plant had already In particular, it was suggested that hydro- been in place and used for energy production power should not be regarded as a poten- until the 1960s. With the DSS it was deter- tial energy source that needs to be investi- mined which parts of the stream could be gated, except in the case of small off-grid used to produce the required energy, as well power plants in specific areas. For example, as the length of the segments. The aim was the stakeholders suggested that an analy- to “choose” the shortest segment with the sis should be carried out to determine what required production potential. It should be could be obtained from the DSS that would noted that the results strongly depend on help to supply an “info point” in the Park area the accuracy of the river bed profile and on in Sospirolo with electricity. Figure 5.2.5 the resolution of the digital elevation model. shows the map that was produced. Starting

Figure 5.2.5: Map showing the hydropower Re c ome nde d potential of a stream near Mis lake (Source: Regione Veneto and EURAC)

For forest biomass some interesting sug- (Interreg IV Italy – Austria 2007/2013), re- gestions were provided. In particular for the ferring not to forest compartments but in- Mis Valley, stakeholders suggested that of stead to forest typologies. the amount of energy that could be produced The results are described in more detail in from material obtained from cleaning near the report Progetto recharge.green: equi- roads and electric power lines should be an- librio fra energia e natura (publication in alysed. As the forest plans could not be used, Italian by Regione del Veneto, available on data were gathered from the project NESBA the recharge.green web site). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 83 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Stakeholders were asked to rank ecosystem analysis where areas were defined that were anking of values 2. R services values: to be excluded from the production of energy because of their intrinsic value. ●● Environmental value Figure 5.2.6 shows the ranking for the two ●● Economic value valleys. As one can see, the priorities are ●● Touristic and recreational value quite different. Because the Dolomiti Na- ●● Social value tional Park makes up a large proportion of ●● Emotional-sentimental value the Mis Valley (the entire central part), the ●● Historical and cultural value environmental value comes first. In the Maè ●● Aesthetic and landscape value. Valley, on the other hand, due to its specific features and its recent depopulation, the Then they were asked to justify their choic- stakeholders felt that the need to increase es: all the collected information, especially opportunities for work and services was the data put on maps directly were used to most important there, to enable people to define new input files for the DSS. In par- live in the valley. As someone reported during ticular, emotional-sentimental, histori- the meetings, “first technological networks cal-cultural, and social values were used to and then environmental networks” meaning produce a map showing the intrinsic value of that if people can stay and live there, then the respective areas. The map was used for they will also be interested in environmental a module (“recommended”) of r.green in an issues and do something about them.

Figure 5.2.6: 6” 7” 6” 7” Classification of values. 1” 1” 5” The two graphs show the 5” rankings of the values for Mis Maè the Mis and Maè valleys. The 4” 4” areas have different colours 2” 2” depending on the values 3” 3” represented and different Social 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 sizes depending on the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Touristic and recreational Emotional-sentim. importance placed on them Economic by the stakeholders Aesthetic and landscape (Source: Regione Veneto) Historical and Curtural Environmental

The involvement of stakeholders was ex- streams; minimum environmental flows ocal social and 3. L , tremely fruitful. Many suggestions were should be evaluated in a wider sense; political suggestions collected concerning a variety of different ●● Forest biomass can represent a source topics and aspects of the project and the of energy and support local economies, methodology adopted. These can be sum- and its use can be favourable for the marised as follows: maintenance of open spaces and for ●● It is important to evaluate energy sav- controlling spontaneous afforestation. ings and efficiency measures as part of However, simpler laws are needed, es- the 20-20-20 goals. Before analysing pecially regarding the management of the potential for renewable energy, es- private/public forest areas. pecially where energy independence is ●● High value woods should be preserved at stake, it is important to have an idea for other economic activities; of the real energy consumption in the ●● Local authorities ask for the opportunity valleys; to plan the use of natural resources at ●● Local people should be involved right the medium scale (within the province), from the beginning of the process of en- to identify areas that need to be pre- ergy planning; served, and to be able to express a bind- ●● In the case of hydropower, it is neces- ing opinion on authorisation procedures. sary to preserve the last untouched Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 84 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: What makes a DSS useful for public administrations?

Dr. For. Sergio Zen, Regione del Veneto, Parks Biodiversity, Forest Planning and Consumer Protection

Question: : Considering your experience in Question: What are the advantages that a technical aspects of public administration, participatory approach involving the local what are the features/characteristics of a population can have for the use of forest re- DSS that would make it really useful and ap- sources for energy purposes? plicable for natural resource management in Answer: IIt is important to pay attention to mountain areas? the communication with stakeholders and Answer: Information must be relevant and local communities to make it more efficient updated to build a useful database, at sev- and continuous, rather than sporadic. This eral levels – with “hierarchical” information. can help to avoid controversies and conflicts A DSS can be easy to understand in technical with management and planning choices. On Dr. For. Sergio Zenis a civil servant and sector-based fields; however, if it is also the other hand, communication provides op- at the Regione del Veneto Section applied for non-sectorial fields, the informa- portunities for including suggestions, as well for Parks, Biodiversity, Forest Plan- tion must be defined in a hierarchical way, as historical and territorial knowledge that ning, and Consumer Protection. He is responsible for the forest planning from a level that is more general to a more only the local communities can provide. office and has been working on pro- specific one. cedures regarding the management Question: Considering your experience, and monitoring of the Veneto forest Question: How can a DSS help to use re- what could be the future of renewable ener- areas for many years. sources from forest areas in a better way gy development in the Alps? and to guarantee ecological sustainability in Answer: Renewable energy sources, by na- the use of these resources themselves? ture, are spread over a wide area; their use Answer: To guarantee both an economical- involves collecting, planning and redistrib- ly and ecologically sustainable use of forest uting. The challenge will be to find the best resources, it is important to have detailed and lowest impact solutions for these three and coherent information on the dynam- activities, from an Alpine mountain perspec- ic evolution of the area of interest, and to tive. update this information. For example, the structure of forests changes slowly, while other habitats can change more rapidly, for both natural and human-made reasons. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 85 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.3 Trade-off between energy exploitation and ecosystem services in Gesso and Vermenagna valleys

The Gesso and Vermenagna valleys are lo- as the most exploitable renewable energy cated in north-western Italy, in the Piedmont source, and the current and future develop- Region. The two valleys include seven mu- ment of hydropower. In this section, we pro- nicipalities (Valdieri, Entracque, Roaschia, vide an overview on the trade-off and con- Roccavione, Robilante, Vernante and Limone flict analysis, starting from the opinions of Piemonte), with a surface area of approx- technicians (experts) and citizens and end- imately 51,500 ha. In 2010 the population ing with a spatial evaluation produced by the was about 10,000 inhabitants with a densi- decision support system. ty of 0.194 inhabitant/ha. The Maritime Alps We interviewed eight experts belonging to Natural Park and Natura 2000 sites of the different branches such as hydraulics, for- Maritime Alps are the most important pro- est management and environmental protec- tected areas of the two valleys. The principal tion, who provided their different points of renewable energy used is hydropower. In the view about the renewable energy potential study area, there are 21 hydropower plants and impact. Qualitative analyses of relevant and the total installed power is 1137.37 MW. impacts on ecosystem services, society and The most powerful power plants are sited in the economy were carried out for two cases: Entracque (1065 MW) and in Andonno (65 a “high”/“very high” and a “low”/“very low” MW) and represent more than 99% of the renewable energy potential, so as to collect installed capacity. These big plants were more feedback on the experts´ perceptions. built before the establishment of the Natu- More details about the experts’ perceptions ral Park of the Maritime Alps and the Natura can be found in the project report on Re- 2000 sites. The power plant in Roccavione is newable energy and ecosystem services in also significant (1420 kW). It should be not- the Alps: Status quo and trade-off between ed that in Robilante there is an intake that renewable energy expansion and ecosystem derives water for the hydroelectric plant lo- services valorisation, which is available for cated in Borgo San Dalmazzo, which is out- download on the recharge.green website. side the boundaries of the study area. This Hydropower in particular is perceived to hydropower plant has a capacity of 2630 kW. have a negative impact on ecosystem ser- The local economy is based mainly on tour- vices overall, but this negative perception ism (about 121,000 tourists per year) and changes slightly if the capacity of a run-off secondarily on agriculture and forestry. In plant decreases from one MW to lower than this pilot area we have analysed the possible 100 kW (Figure 5.3.1). use of forest biomass, which was identified Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 86 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.3.1: Expected impacts on ecosystem services of a run-off plant with different capacities in the Gesso and Vermenagna Valleys. (Source: EURAC)

Experts’ opinions do not always correspond on renewable energy in general, and about to citizens’ views. For this reason, and to the local development of solar photovoltaic collect information about the preferences power, windpower, hydropower and forest of the residents in the Gesso-Vermenagna biomass more specifically. The respondents pilot region, we used a structured question- assessed - using a 5-point Likert scale - the naire composed by 27 closed-ended ques- current level of development and the poten- tions. The structured questionnaire was tial future development of renewable energy administered face-to-face to a sample of in the Gesso-Vermenagna valleys, and the residents in the two valleys. The question- impacts of renewable energy development naire was structured to gather information on ecosystem services (Figure 5.3.3).

Run-off plant (Small Hydropower) Reservoir plant (Large Hydropower) Figure 5.3.2: Run-off plants (small hydropower) classified on the basis of the plant’s capacity for the expert survey and reservoir plant (large hydropower). (Source: EURAC) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 87 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The perceived impacts of renewable energy experts’ opinions. For example in the case development on ecosystem services were of large hydropower plants, citizens of the evaluated only for hydropower, distinguish- two valleys do not feel negatively about the ing between reservoir plants (large hydro- impact of hydropower development on water power) and run-off plants (small hydropow- quality, while the experts agree that it would er) (Figure 5.3.2). It should be noted that the put negative pressures on wildlife habitats citizen’s perception can disagree with the and on water quality.

Figure 5.3.3: Perceived impact on water quality: citizens´ and experts´ perceptions. (Source: EURAC)

The survey among experts and citizens was exploitation and ecosystem services. only the first step of this analysis. Possible Starting from the r.green.hydro.theorethical conflicts on the use of the water resources module, we considered the energy potential were identified during consultations with a in the case of run-off plants. The theoretical focus group composed of local stakeholders. potential is quite high in the two valleys as By integrating the stakeholders‘ opinions shown in the map (Figure 5.3.4), where the into the r.green decision support system, we segments are classified into segments with were able to analyse possible trade-offs and very high (dark brown) to very low (dark blue) existing conflicts between renewable energy potential.

Figure 5.3.4: he ore t ic a l Theoretical hydropower T potential in the Gesso and Vermenagna valleys (Source: EURAC) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 88 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Currently, the hydropower reservoir of En- a result of irrigation as provided for in the traque is used to store water not only for en- regional law (Art. 9, D.P.G.R. 17 luglio 2007, ergy purposes but also for the irrigation of n. 8/R).The priority is the use of water for agricultural plains; consequently, it changes provisioning services, i.e. irrigation, which the water availability downstream from the is held to be more important than possible Sant’Anna weir. In fact, downstream from hydroelectric uses downstream from the the Sant’Anna village the water quantity in weir or other ecosystem values (biodiversity, the river is about 500 l/s and decreases to habitat, etc.) (Figure 5.3.5). about 180 l/s during the summer period as

Figure 5.3.5: Decrease of hydropower Te c hnic a l potential downstream from S. Anna due to the current use of water not only for hydroelectric but also for irrigation purposes. (Source: EURAC)

Secondly, during the focus group meetings be assumed within the protected area of we asked the stakeholders to identify river the Natural Park of the Maritime Alps. The zones with a high recreational or aesthet- r.green.hydro.economic module was run by ic value. The stakeholders identified a cycle setting the price of energy equal to 0.1€/ path along the river close to Vermenante. In kWh. The map (Figure 5.3.6) shows the river order to maintain or increase the aesthetic segments with a positive net present value value of the river, a greater quantity of water in green, with the sites suitable for new hy- should be assured. In this case, we set the dropower plants only selected on the basis minimum flow discharge equal to 50% of the of economic criteria. These sites are at the natural discharge computed, referring to heart of the protected area, where new arti- the local plan (“Piano di tutela delle acque”, ficial water flows cannot be designed. This is introduced in 2007). The energy potential a clear trade-off between energy production changes from medium to low in several river and existing plans for biodiversity preser- segments in the highlighted area. vation. The protected area has a high biodi- Finally, local energy producers identified ar- versity value that should be preserved. Only eas with a high energy potential and where plants in secondary networks or aqueducts the financial feasibility of hydropower can are therefore allowed. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 89 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.3.6: Re c omme nde d (dis c h a rge ) Economic feasibility of run-off plants in the Gesso and Vermenagna valleys. (Source: EURAC)

E c onomic

The results of the decision support sys- point for the discussion with local stakehold- tem r.green confirm that the tool has the ers. By integrating the stakeholders’ needs potential to enhance the understanding of and expert knowledge in the r.green GIS tool, planning considerations and to increase the a spatial analysis of existing and potential objectivity of trade-off and conflict evalua- conflicts has been possible. tions. In fact, the first results were a starting Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 90 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Grilli, G., Curetti, G., De Meo, I., Garegnani, G., Miotello, F., Poljanec, A., Vettorato, D.; Paletto, A. (2015): Experts’ Perceptions of the Effects of Forest Biomass Harvesting on Sustainability in the Alpine Region. SEEFOR (South-east European forestry), 6(1), 77-95. 2. Garegnani, G; Zambelli, P; Curetti, G.; Grilli, G.; Biscaini, S; Sacchelli, S.; Geri, F; Ciolli, M; Vettorato, D. (2015): A decision support system for hydropower production in the Gesso e Vermenagna valleys. E-proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress 2015.6.28-2015.07.03 The Hague, The Netherland 3. Kraxner, F.; Leduc, S.; Serrano León, H.; Balest, J.; Garegnani, G.; Grilli, G.; Ciolli, C.; Geri, F.; Paletto, A.; Poljanec, A. (2015): Report: Recommendations and lessons learned for a renewable energy strategy in the Alps. Download: http://www.recharge-green.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/WP5- Recomendation_kompr.pdf 4. Website of the Maritime Alps Natural Park http://www.parcoalpimarittime.it/

5.4 Strategic environmental assessment in the bioenergy sector: the natural capital concept and the environmental impacts

When the expansion of renewable energy the forest against natural hazards such as production is planned without careful in- landslides and rock falls may be adversely vestigation of the potential consequences affected by extensive wood collection. of the envisioned production and manage- An SEA represents an important tool to take ment strategies, the intensification of land into account these and other possible ef- use often leads to the depletion of natural fects. Although the environmental aspects resources. The strategic environmental as- of plans and programmes are of particular sessment (SEA) procedure is a useful tool concern, these are not the only areas of con- for anticipating the potential effects of new cern in an SEA. The SEA procedure also deals power plants. with the impacts of planned activities on so- In the case of forest biomass use for bioen- ciety, on human health and on social factors ergy the interactions between the human concerning the affected territory. The Euro- energy need and natural resources are par- pean Directive 2001/42/CE foresees a series ticularly important. Harvesting forest bio- of criteria that the SEA procedure should mass produces both positive and negative consider: effects. On the positive side, using wood for energy rather than fossil-fuel based energy ●● the probability, duration, frequency and sources, contributes to the reduction of CO2 reversibility of the effects; emissions. Wood collection can also reduce ●● the cumulative nature of the effects; forest fire risks. Some people also perceive ●● the trans-boundary nature of the ef- forest paths that are “clean” of dead wood fects; and other plant residues as more aesthetic. ●● the risks to human health or the envi- On the other hand, forest biomass withdraw- ronment (e.g. due to accidents); al depletes forest soil fertility with negative ●● the magnitude and spatial extent of the consequences on resilience and biodiver- effects (geographical area and size of sity. In addition, the protection function of the population likely to be affected); Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 91 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

●● the value and vulnerability of the area practice the applied methodologies vary likely to be affected due to: significantly from case to case. Despite ●● special natural characteristics or cul- the difference of approaches and consid- tural heritage; ered variables, all implementations of the ●● exceeded environmental quality stand- SEA procedure share the same objective: ards or limit values; They are aimed at comparing alternatives ●● intensive land-use; for the identification of the most viable and ●● the effects on areas or landscapes which effective pathway for future development. have a recognised international, nation- Against this background, a decision support al, or local protection status. system (DSS), such as r.green, represents a useful tool for the implementation of an SEA The Directive requires the indicators to be in the energy sector by accounting for the considered, but it does not suggest a spe- environmental impacts of new power plants cific procedure. Thus both in theory and in including all the ancillary activities involved.

Figure 5.4.1: The steps for implementing an SEA procedure (Source: EURAC)

We implemented a 5 step SEA procedure forest types are European beech forests (Figure 5.4.1) for addressing the prescrip- (11.500 ha) and chestnut forests (2.700 ha). tion of the Directive: There are also smaller extents of mixed forests with maple, linden and ash. The average 1. Data collection standing stock is 183 m3/ha with some im- 2. Data analysis portant differences among forest types: 245 3. Formulation of alternatives m3/ha in chestnut forests, 156 m3/ha in 4. GIS modelling mixed broadleaved forests and 149 m3/ha in 5. Evaluation of scenarios European beech forests. The average annual increment is 7.73 m3/ha/year. The harvest- A case study from the Gesso and Verme- ing rate varies depending on the forest type: nagna valleys (Italy) serves as an example 45% of the annual increment is in European of this procedure. The study area of Ges- beech and mixed broadleaved forests, and so-Vermenagna (44° 15’ 00” N, 7° 32’ 00” E) 80% in chestnut forests. is located in the north-western part of Italy The environmental impacts of increasing (Piedmont Region) close to the French bor- biomass energy use were assessed by con- der. 32,000 ha of the area are protected ar- sidering changes in the natural capital value. eas (Maritime Alps Natural Park and Natura Since removing biomass from forests has an 2000 sites). The main land uses are forests impact on several ecosystem services, we (42%) and pastures (33%). Regarding own- implemented the SEA procedure by assum- ership about 45% are public forests while the ing that removal of more biomass for energy remaining 55% are private forests. The main results in higher impacts on the environ- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 92 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

ment. The underlying idea for implementing is used for energy, the higher is the impact the SEA procedure is that the more biomass on the environment.

Data collection was supported by represent- ecosystem services. In this way we were able ata ollection D C atives from the Alpi Maritime Natural Park. to assess the current value and project how In order to apply an SEA, spatially explicit this value may change after the withdraw- forest data were needed. In particular, we al of forest biomass for energy purposes. required and collected data on forest an- Finally, we conducted a questionnaire with nual increment, forest types, forest roads local experts to gain a better understand- and main local typologies of forest mecha- ing of their perception about the impact of nization. In addition, data were compiled for exploiting biomass for bioenergy. estimating the economic value of selected

The focus of data analysis was on i) assess- soils are an important carbon sink coun- ata analysis D ing current local energy consumption; ii) the teracting negative effects of increased local potential for further development of greenhouse gas emissions. Removing biomass energy; iii) the expected impact biomass from forests reduces future of increased biomass use for energy, both quantities of sequestered carbon. Such on the ecosystem services and on local so- impact was assessed to be around -14%. cio-economic development. The data on the 3. A slightly positive impact on the recre- expected impact on ecosystem services are ational value of the forests. A positive particularly important because they facili- relationship between recreation and tate an assessment of the changes in nat- forest biomass withdrawal is justified ural capital following removal of biomass because, after collecting wood, forest for energy from the forest. In the Gesso and seems to be much more clean and well- Vermenagna valleys, we interviewed eight kept. The positive impact was estimated experts in the fields of renewable energy to be around 8%. and nature conservation who estimated the following impacts of increased biomass re- The cited percentages are used to model moval on ecosystem services: the variation of the natural capital stock fol- 1. A negative impact on protection against lowing the withdrawal of forest biomass for natural hazards (e.g. landslides and ero- bioenergy. We´ve generated maps depicting sion). The average impact on the value of ecosystem services to gain a better under- protection was assessed to be around standing of the spatially-explicit impacts -15%; of biomass removal and highlight the areas 2. A negative impact on the carbon se- most affected. questration service. Forests and forest

The formulation of alternatives is a crucial Natural Park to define two scenarios. The ormulation of F step in an SEA, as it highlights the impacts first one foresees the exploitation of public alternatives of defined alternative pathways. In the Ges- forests, the second one both public and pri- so and Vermenagna valleys we agreed with vate forests. the representatives of the Alpi Marittime

r.green.biomassfor calculates the ener- sents the amount of forest biomass that can odelling GIS M gy potential from biomass sources using a technically be extracted from the forest, i.e. modular structure. Each module calculates with the existing technology. We analysed the energy potential for each of the following the impact on selected ecosystem services assumptions: theoretical, legal, technical, based on an extraction level derived from the recommended and economic potentials (see calculation of technical potential. Although it Chapter 3.4). The technical potential repre- is unlikely to be recommendable to extract Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 93 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

the entire technical potential, we showed potential. GIS modelling allows the creation this map during the focus group because it of a potential map showing the quantity of is more flexible and to produce scenarios bioenergy that can technically be extracted, under different assumptions. The technical as shown in Figure 5.4.2 for the first scenario potential was then integrated with stake- and Figure 5.4.3 for the second scenario. holders comments to derive the economic

Figure 5.4.2: e c hnic a l Scenario 1: Potential of the T forest biomass for bioenergy from public forests, exploitable with technical parameters calculated by r.green.biomassfor. technical. The outputs of the model were provided by the University of Trento who developed the module r.green.biomassfor. (Source: University of Trento and EURAC)

The economic potential foresees the con- cause the transport costs from the forest to struction of a (hypothetical) biomass plant the plant may change significantly depend- in the valley. The location is important being on location.

Figure 5.4.3: Scenario 2: Potential of the Te c hnic a l forest biomass for bioenergy from both private and public forests calculated by r.green.biomassfor.technical. (Source: University of Trento and EURAC). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 94 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

For both scenarios we assumed construction The expected impacts of Scenario 2 (Forest of a biomass plant. The location, between the biomass removal for bioenergy from both two valleys, was chosen with the aid of a lo- public and private forests) on the ecosys- cal expert with the rational to allow easy and tem services is represented in Figure 5.4.4 efficient collection of wood biomass from the (before extraction of biomass for bioenergy) different extraction sites. Note that the cho- and 5.4.5 (after extraction). The two maps sen location is hypothetical and no economic highlight how the value of the natural capital feasibility studies have been conducted. The changes when the wood is extracted. location is only justified by the efficiency in gathering the collected wood.

Figure 5.4.4: The value of ecosystem services before the extraction. (Source: EURAC and CRA-MPF)

Figure 5.4.5: Expected value of ecosystem services after the collection of wood biomass for energy (Source: EURAC and CRA-MPF) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 95 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

As a general trend, the economic value of tial dimension of the impacts. For example, ecosystem services is expected to decrease. forests assessed as having high ecosystem In particular, before wood extraction for bio- services value may be preserved for conser- mass energy, large areas in the category me- vation purposes, while less important are- dium level value (yellow color) change to the as may be exploited further. Such scenario medium-low category (orange colour) after analysis together with assessments on local biomass has been removed. Other changes energy supply potentials are an important are visible in other part of the map. The use- tool for decision making. fulness of this approach relates to the spa-

The spatial visualization of the effects of people´s opinion that local biomass availa- cenario evaluation S biomass extraction on the environment al- bility is highly unpredictable and may change lows an optimal identification of areas for significantly from year to year. In such a biomass extraction. Areas where energy situation, a single large (or medium-sized) exploitation would have no or only small ef- power plant for the seven municipalities may fects on the environment may be explored be too expensive and the return on the in- further for potential biomass extraction. In vestment too uncertain to justify the con- contrast, areas where such activities would struction. Apparently, participants think that have high impact areas should be avoided. more than one plant, i.e. one in each munic- An important feature of the SEA is the par- ipality, could be more beneficial for the local ticipation of local stakeholders. All proposed economy (Figure 5.4.6). This outcome of the development plans should be shared with stakeholder involvement was not predicta- the people who could be affected, in order ble for someone from outside the Gesso and to avoid conflicts and facilitate the local ac- Vermenagna valleys and provides strong ev- ceptance of projects. In the Gesso and Ver- idence that the involvement of local stake- menagna valleys case study, the results of holders is important during decision making. the potentials and the expected impacts on A participatory SEA procedure may yield un- the environment were presented in three fo- expected results. cus groups. Participants were invited to select the preferred development alternative. In conclusion, it is important to highlight Stakeholders in general showed an overall that SEA deals both with environmental and preference for further development of the socio-economic aspects of plans. It has to wood-energy supply chain, but they were integrate concerns about people´s health, highly critical of the construction of only one future expected incomes and the effects on medium or large biomass plant as opposed local socio-economic developments. to several smaller sized plants. This is due to Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 96 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.4.6: Preferred solution for bioenergy development according to local stakeholders: Percentage of energy consumption covered by biomass plant based on short-chain principle. The discussion during the focus group was managed by CRA- MPF, Trento. (Source: EURAC)

Further Reading 1. Therivel, R. (2004): Strategic Environmental Assessment in Action. ed. Earthscan. London. 2. Mörtberg, U M, B Balfors, and W C Knol. (2007). “Landscape Ecological Assessment: A Tool for Integrating Biodiversity Issues in Strategic Environmental Assessment and Planning.” Journal of environmental management 82(4): 457–70. 3. Lee, N., & Walsh, F. (1992): Strategic environmental assessment: an overview. Project appraisal, 7(3), 126-136. 4. Finnveden, G., Nilsson, M., Johansson, J., Persson, A., Moberg, Å., & Carlsson, T. (2003): Strategic environmental assessment methodologies—applications within the energy sector. Environmental impact assessment review, 23(1), 91-123. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 97 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: Ecosystem services in the Gesso and Vermenagna valleys

Luca Giraudo, Natural Park of the Maritime Alps

Question: In your opinion, what are the most ecosystem services that you have previous- important ecosystem services for the ter- ly identified. If yes, how? ritory of Gesso and Vermenagna valleys? Answer: Yes, we have already experienced Could you list them in order of importance? the overexploitation of some natural re- Does the presence or absence of a protect- sources due to the presence of hydropower ed area affect this order? plants and irrigation systems: the return of Answer: In my opinion, the order of impor- water downstream of weirs and dams, i.e. tance of the most important ecosystem ser- the minimum vital discharge, is insufficient vices in our territory is: to maintain the habitat and the vitality of the a. Recreational services, i.e. sports and stream ecology. Luca Giraudo is an ornithologist and tourism activities related to nature Currently forest wood is not widely and sig- environmental tour guide. He works b. Provision of drinking water and the use nificantly exploited. In my opinion, a future in the Maritime Alps Natural Park The available water resources use of forest biomass can hardly affect large Park and Luca Giraudo collaborated with EURAC Research in the recharge. for irrigation and energy purposes areas of the park due to the inaccessibility of green activities. He provided impor- c. Potential for firewood collection many forest sectors. tant support to the researchers. d. Cattle breeding and derived products e. Fishing and related economic income Question: What is the level of exploitation of Definitely, there are some positive and neg- renewable energy in Gesso and Vermenagna ative influences on ecosystem services due valleys? Do you think that there might still to the protected area designation. Especial- be room for future development? If so, what ly, the Alpi Maritime Natural Park increases measures can be put in place to minimize the value of recreational services. Besides, negative impacts on ecosystem services? it positively affects the local economy by in- Answer: In the case of hydropower, the only creasing job opportunities in the valley and option is to exploit the conducts of the aq- decreasing commuter numbers. On the oth- ueducts; otherwise, according to the current er hand, I would like to underline also some legal framework, the potential is zero. In the negative impacts, i.e. the increasing air pol- case of aqueducts, the impact should be lution linked to unsustainable tourism, as minimal. well as the greater impact on some complex In my opinion, for the use of forest biomass, and delicate ecosystems due to a high pop- the area that would be workable for exploita- ulation concentration. tion is too small to meet the demand of an economically feasible plant. The impact of an intensive use may affect the air quality Question: The exploitation of renewable and the traffic, especially if a power plant energy sources (forest biomass and hydro- were located at the bottom of the valley. power) can decrease the efficiency of the Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 98 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: Mapping ecosystem services

When planning an environmental interven- There are many methods of ecosystem ser- tion, such as renewable energy development, vices mapping. The simplest method consists an important challenge is the understanding of establishing binary links between land use how ecosystems, and ecosystem services, and the value of ecosystem services. A more may be affected by the planned activities. sophisticated, but still simple, approach is The renewable energy sector plays a key role to ask experts to rank useful environmental in the context of climate change mitigation. In variables based on their know-how. Similarly, order to assure sustainable management, it is literature-review-based mapping is also pop- important to foresee and anticipate the pos- ular, as are field survey-based approaches. sible effects of decisions to expand the share In addition, there are several useful software of renewable energy. Within the environmen- packages, such as AIRES and InVEST that may tal decision-making process, assessing and help in the challenge of mapping ecosystem mapping ecosystem services is becoming a services. To produce an effective and reliable more and more common practice. The con- map of ecosystem services, human-ecologi- cept of ecosystem services stresses the at- cal relationships should be clearly identified. tention on the interaction between humans For example, the importance of mountain for- and ecosystems, so an effective mapping ests for hazard protection could be mapped should include both environmental and social based on the potential risks for human ac- considerations. Providing a spatial map of tivities and settlements, while the recrea- the ecosystem services allows the investiga- tional values could be made spatially explicit tion of how ecosystem services vary across by looking at the areas with the highest con- space and the identification of the areas with centration of tourists. More generally, a large high or low values of the ecosystem services. number of environmental data and thematic As a general rule, ecosystem services analy- layers may be integrated into a spatial anal- sis consists of two main processes: ysis. ●● valuing ecosystem services through Providing a general mapping framework quantitative measures, and would be extremely complicated, each pilot area has its own specific features and should ●● spatial mapping. provide the best inputs for mapping its ter- The valuation of ecosystem services is es- ritory. Even though in the literature there sential for providing a measure of the im- are examples of mapping ecosystem servic- portance of an ecosystem service. There are es at very large scales (for example for all of plenty of techniques for the quantification of Europe), these kinds of evaluations are ex- ecosystem services including multi-criteria tremely general and may not reflect the real analysis, economic valuation, technical and situation at the local scale. It is therefore ecological assessments. Spatial mapping, recommended to use an approach such as on the other hand, is fundamental to provide the one of the recharge.green project, which a clear overview of the share of ecosystems combined the opinion of the representatives under pressure and to avoid further depletion of the local study area with expert knowledge, of the environment. as described in this chapter.

Further Reading 1. BISE (2015): ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and Their Services (MAES). Biodiversity Information System for Europe. http://biodiversity.europa.eu/maes. 2. Guerry, A.D., Polasky, S.; Lubchenco, J.; Chaplin-Kramer, R.; Daily, G.C.; Griffin, R.; Ruckelshaus, M. et al. (2015): Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services Informing Decisions: From Promise to Practice’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112 (24): 7348–55. doi:10.1073/pnas.1503751112.12 (24): 7337–38. 3. Paletto, A., Geitner, C., Grilli, G., Hastik, R., Pastorella, F., Garcia Rodriguez, L. (2015): Spatial distribution of ecosystem services’ values supplied by forests and grasslands: case study from the Austrian Alp Annals of forest research 58(1) 4. Rodríguez García, L., Curetti G., Garegnani, G., Grilli, G., Pastorella, F., Paletto, A. (2015) : La Valoración De Los Servicios Ecosistémicos En Los Bosques: El Caso De Estudio En Los Alpes Italianos, Bosque. 5. West, A. (2015): Core Concept: Ecosystem Services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 99 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.5 Forest biomass use and biodiversity in the Triglav National Park

Landscapes in the Alps reflect centuries of of forest resources, which might repre- ntroduction I human activities. In the past, traditional ac- sent a threat to biodiversity and increase tivities such as timber production and live- the conflict between the use of natural re- stock grazing considerably changed natural sources and nature protection objectives landscapes in the Alps 4. Today, these tradi- in the Park. Successful management of bi- tional activities have become important for omass potentials and balancing potential the preservation of cultural landscapes and conflicts between forestry exploitation and local development. Therefore, forest man- nature protection calls for an understand- agement and agricultural land use are still ing of the spatial patterns of biomass sup- practiced in some protected areas such as ply and demand and the impact of biomass the Triglav National Park in Slovenia. In the exploitation on biodiversity. To achieve these last decades, there has been an increasing complex tasks, we have employed a mixed demand for wood biomass for energy, mainly assessment using both ecological and so- due to the high productive potential of for- cio-economic approaches and supplement- ests within the park, but also due to increased those with the use of GIS. The analysis in- ing fuel prices and the expected transition cludes three steps: 1) Stakeholder analysis; to renewable energies. Biomass production 2) Modelling of forest biomass potential; and is a promising opportunity for forest owners 3) Assessing the impact of forest biomass to earn additional income. However, increas- use for energy on ecosystem services and ing demand could also lead to the overuse biodiversity.

Triglav National Park (TNP) (Figure 7.18) is Alps. It covers an area of almost 840 km2 he riglav ational T T N the only national park and the largest pro- (4% of the Slovenian surface). TNP has been Park pilot area tected area in Slovenia 1. TNP extends along among the first European national parks and the Italian border and close to the Austrian was established in 1924 as the first protect- border in the north-western part of Slovenia. ed area in Slovenia. Its territory occupies almost the entire area of the Slovenian part of the Eastern Julian

Figure 5.5.1: Study area: Triglav National Park, Slovenia (Source: TNP) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 100 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The Park’s landscape is characterized by left to natural processes and only minor pro- glacier-shaped valleys, mountain plateaus tection measures are allowed. In the sec- and steep mountain ridges above the tree ond and third protection zones, sustainable line. It is a typical mixture between unspoiled and close-to-nature forest management is nature areas and a cultural landscape. For- practiced regularly. est covers two thirds of the park’s territo- The Park provides a variety of ecosystem ry. The main forest types include: Montane, services such as nature conservation (habi- altimontane and subalpine European beech tat for fauna and flora), various environmen- forests on carbonate and mixed bedrock tal protection functions, conservation of (28,237 ha), dwarf mountain pine forests cultural heritage, and recreation and tour- (11,336 ha), silver fir-European beech for- ism 11. Agriculture and forestry are impor- ests (4,925 ha), and silver fir-Norway spruce tant economic activities for people living in forests (3,676 ha) 8. All forests in the Park the Park 7. Among the various renewable en- are under forest management plans elab- ergy sources, wood biomass has the great- orated by the Slovenia Forest Service. The est potential for sustainable use. Park is divided into three protection zones. In the first zone, the core zone, forests are

Before the analysis of forest biomass poten- analytical categorization (classification) of takeholder analysis S tial, a stakeholder analysis was performed to the stakeholders into a professional rela- identify all (formal and informal) groups of tionship network using Social Network Anal- people who share a stake in renewable ener- ysis (SNA). gy, forest management and nature conser- In the first step, experts identified 31 stake- vation. In addition, according to the analysis holders belonging to the following categories of the stakeholders’ interests, the conflicts of interests (Table 5.5.1): Public institutions between different users, and the relation- (51.6%), local associations/non-govern- ships we’ve classified the stakeholders into mental organizations (19.4%), and private groups with different levels of interest (e.g. organizations (29.0%). All 31 suggested key stakeholders, primary stakeholders stakeholders were considered in the future and secondary stakeholders). A three step stages of the project. Stakeholders were in- method 1 based on expert assessment was volved at different levels according to their applied: (1) Identification of the experts by role in the network. Key stakeholders were brainstorming among the partners of the involved for cooperation and consultation; recharge.green project; (2) Identification of primary stakeholders were consulted, while local stakeholders based on experts’ opin- others were only informed about the deci- ions and information, gathered through sions. semi-structured questionnaires; and (3) An Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 101 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Table 5.5.1: Name of stakeholder Category N° preferences List of stakeholders in TNP Public institution of Triglav National Park (TNP) Public institution 9 identified by recharge.green Slovenia Forest Service Public institution 8 experts University of Ljubljana Public institution 7 Association of forest owners Private organization 5 Municipality of Bohinj Public institution 5 Institute of the Republic of Slovenia for Nature Public institution 4 Conservation Agrarian community Dovje Mojstrana Private organization 4 Company EL-TEC Mulej (Society for Energy and Private organization 4 Environmental Solutions) Agricultural/Forest Cooperative Association-NGO 3 Ministry of agriculture and the environment Public institution 3 Forest company GG Bled Private organization 2 DOPPS - Birdlife Slovenia Association-NGO 2 Slovenian Environment Agency Public institution 2 CIPRA Slovenia Association-NGO 2 Slovenian Forestry Institute Public institution 2 Bled-Tourist Association Private organization 1 Alpine Association of Slovenia Association-NGO 1 Institute for the protection of Cultural Heritage Public institution 1 of Slovenia LEAG - Local Energy Agency of Gorenjska Public institution 1 Fisheries Research Institute of Slovenia Public institution 1 Municipality of Gorje Public institution 1 Municipality of Kranjska Gora Public institution 1 Municipality of Bled Public institution 1 GOLEA - Goriška Local Energy Agency Public institution 1 Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Slovenia Association 1 RAGOR - Upper Gorenjska development Agency Private organization 1 Regional Development Agency of Gorenjska Public institution 1 Association of hoteliers Private organization 1 Archdiocese of Ljubljana Church association 1 Company Lip Bohinj d.o.o. Private organization 1 Machine club Bled Private organization 1

In the second step, we identified and cate- Other stakeholders with high power and gorized the local stakeholders by asking two the ability to disseminate information are questions: First, respondents (i.e. experts) the Bled-Tourist Association and the forest were asked to indicate local stakeholders enterprise GG Bled. There are some other that should be involved in the participatory stakeholders in an intermediate position, decision-making process, assessing four key such as the public institution of Triglav Na- attributes for each stakeholder: power, legit- tional Park and the agrarian community imacy, urgency, and proximity. Second, ex- Dovje Mojstrana. These stakeholders have perts identified the stakeholders with whom substantial decision-making power, but low- they maintain a professional relationship in er ability to spread information compared to the field of renewable energy. The stakehold- the above-mentioned powerful stakeholder with the greatest power and ability to dis- ers. The opposite is true for the company seminate information is the Institute of the EL-TEC Mulej, which is able to disseminate Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conserva- specific information on renewable ener- tion, who represents a “bridge” between the gy sources to a group of four stakeholders rest of the network and four stakeholders: (Municipality of Bled, Goriška Local Energy Slovenian Forest Institute, Municipality of Agency, Local Energy Agency of Gorenjska Kranjska Gora, Fisheries Research Institute and Alpine Association of Slovenia), but has of Slovenia and Ministry of Agriculture and low power in the decision process. the Environment (Figure 5.5.2). Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 102 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.2.2: Social network of Triglav National Park’s stakeholders (Source: University of Ljubljana)

Furthermore, a classification of stakehold- Triglav National Park (TNP) and the Slovenian ers on the basis of their position in the net- Environment Agency. The network analysis work led to the identification of eight key of TNP shows that the key role in the decision stakeholders: the Institute of the Repub- process related to renewable energy is not in lic of Slovenia for Nature Conservation, the the hands of one central stakeholder, but in Bled-Tourist Association, the forest enter- said group of eight key stakeholders. There- prise GG Bled, the Slovenia Forest Service, fore their involvement in decisions related to the company EL-TEC Mulej, the Agricultural/ renewable energy planning is crucial for the Forest Cooperative, the public institution of success of the participatory process.

We used the WISDOM tool to evaluate the ing in the core protection zone, har- odelling forest M potential for biomass use in the study area. vesting in the second protection zone biomass WISDOM is a planning tool that allows users only where the naturalness of forests is to integrate data from various sources and strongly modified, and harvesting in the to conduct multi-scale spatial analysis 5 (see third protection zone only where the for- also chapter 3.6). For modelling purposes, ests are changed; three hypothetical scenarios were devel- ●● Scenario S3 (biomass production sce- oped, as shown in Figure 5.5.3: nario) where we assumed that in the ●● Scenario S1 (business as usual), where third, second and core protection zones current (S1a) and planned (S1b) cut was 100%, 70%, and 30% of the annual in- considered; crement respectively is harvested. ●● Scenario S2 (nature protection scenario), where we hypothesized no harvest- Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 103 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Figure 5.5.3: Spatial distribution of available wood potential including industrial timber and biomass for energy (left) and forest biomass for energy (right) according to: a.) business as usual scenario, b.) nature conservation scenario and c.) biomass production S1a: Current cut – wood potential S1a: Current cut – biomass for energy scenario (Source: TNP)

S1b: Allowed cut – wood potentia S1b: Allowed cut – biomass for energy

S2: Protection scenario – wood potential Protection scenario – biomass for energy

S3: Production scenario – wood potential S3: Production scenario – biomass for energy Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 104 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The current cut presents only one third of woody biomass energy within the Park is rel- the maximum allowable cut in year 2012. atively low (2.940 t/year). Each of the three The highest cut is on the Pokljuka and scenarios could supply sufficient biomass Mežakla plateaus, in the valleys and in better for the current demand within the Park. accessible forests opened with more forest When considering additional demand for en- infrastructure. A maximum allowable cut ergy from bordering towns and cities, which has been defined for all production forests. are highly related to land use in the park, then It is higher in the more productive sites such the estimated demand becomes much high- as spruce forests (e.g. Pokljuka). Scenario 3 er (19,940 t/year). This could still be covered emphasizes wood production and assumes with planned cuts in the management plans harvesting in all forests. However the max- (Scenario 1b; 30,290 t/year) or assuming imum cut could somewhat decrease in areas increased use of forest resources (Scenario where the current cut is currently relatively 3; 40,859 t/year). The current cut (Scenario high (e.g. on Pokljuka). The most wood for bi- 1a; 9,932 t/year) and nature conservation omass use is found in forests in the southern scenario (Scenario 2; 15,365 t/year) covers part of TNP below the mountains Krn and Vo- more than 75 % of energy needs. gel (e.g. Čadrg, Tolminske Ravne). The assessed wood potential is high (high The energy demand in TNP is relatively low. productive forests, increasing forest stock) The population density in the Park is low with and it represents income opportunities 21 settlements and 2,444 inhabitants 10 and for the forest owners. On the other hand, there are no large energy consumers such as over-exploitation might represent a threat industry. The results of forest biomass sup- to biodiversity and to the sustainable use of ply modelling show that current demand for TNP´s forests 6.

Figure 5.5.4: Supply areas corresponding to increased demand for woody biomass in case of establishment of a new biomass plant in Jesenice with an annual consumption of 5000 tons (dark red), 20000 tons (light red) and 30000 tons (yellow) (Source: TNP).

Additionally, we considered increasing de- much broader regions including areas out- mands for biomass use by simulating a new side the Park (Figure 5.5.4). Alternatively, in- biomass plant in Jesenice city with annual creased demands for biomass could be cov- biomass consumption of 5,000 t, 20,000 t, ered by increasing production in the nearby and 30,000 t. Such increased demand could area, which however may result in conflicts be supplied by biomass originating from with the conservation goals of the Park. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 105 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

The potential impact of forest biomass har- has been found to have a positive influence mpact of forest I vesting on ecosystem services was quan- on natural hazard protection 3. The negative biomass harvesting on tified by asking local experts to complete a values derived from the expert survey for ecosystem services questionnaire. Thirteen experts were identi- natural hazard protection could be explained fied taking into account their expertise and by the fact that the process of harvesting local knowledge on ecosystem services and/ logging residues increases soil compaction or bioenergy. The sample of experts is small, and erosion in finely textured and moist because we had to find respondents who soils, and this aspect is particularly relevant have both an extensive knowledge of bioen- in protected areas 1. Cultural services are ergy and/or ecosystem services and a de- likely not affected by biomass withdrawals – tailed knowledge of the study area. Respond- the values of this indicator were estimated ents were asked to express their opinion on around 0. the potential impacts of forest biomass harvesting on the above mentioned ecosystem In conclusion, while the primary objectives of services using a 5-point-Likert scale (from protected areas are nature conservation and -2=very high negative impact to +2=very protection of the environment and its cul- high positive impact). The expected impacts tural heritage, the use of forest resources were aggregated on the basis of three cat- for energy, if properly planned and if the po- egories of ecosystem services: provisioning tential exists (e.g. well-stocked productive services, regulating services and cultural stands) could nevertheless be aligned with services. For each category, the mean value the management objectives of protected ar- was calculated in order to obtain a synthesis eas. However, increase demands for energy indicator of the impact. The mean value of use could have a significant negative influ- the indicator was then converted into a per- ence on biodiversity and could cause conflict centage, expressing the share of economic with nature conservation objectives in the loss or benefit following the use of forest bi- Park. To reduce the risks of biodiversity loss omass for energy. and to avoid contradictory management objectives in the park, careful planning and an The results show that forest biomass har- appropriate forest management system is vesting leads to different positive and neg- needed. A systematic scenario analysis can ative impacts depending on the charac- help to evaluate possible interventions and teristics of ecosystem services in the local support planning. Close-to-nature forestry context of TNP. As expected, provisioning and a rational approach, including constant services are the most positively affect- monitoring, planning and evaluation of reed group of ecosystem services (+ 32% of alized measures, could be the right way to value). The increase of biomass withdrawal deal with overlapping demands for various implies an increase of income generated by ecosystem services. In the study area (and the sales. Regulating services shows a de- in general in all Slovenian forests), close-to- creasing trend. A highly negative impact of nature forestry has been practiced for 50 forest biomass harvesting was identified for years with no significant conflicts between habitat quality (-0.62). Biomass extraction forestry and nature conservation. Within usually lowers the amount of deadwood in the recharge.green project, the Slovenian the forests, which decreases habitat suita- partners supplemented current information bility for saproxylic insects and other dead- on forests available on a 2×2 km permanent wood-dependent organisms 2. We also rec- sample plot grid (maintained by SFS) with ognized a negative impact of forest biomass complementary additional information on harvesting on natural hazard protection soils, vegetation, birds, fungi, etc. This type (-0.23) and on carbon sequestration (-0.15). of forest inventory allows us to gain better The negative values of the indicator for nat- insights into the impacts of biomass use on ural hazard protection are unexpected. The biodiversity and thus improve the evalua- silvi-cultural measures applied under the tion of forest management and biodiversity current forest management practice in TNP 7 monitoring in TNP. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 106 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Grilli G., Curetti G., De Meo I., Garegnani G., Miotello F., Poljanec A., Vettorato D., Paletto A. (2015): Experts’ perceptions of the effects of forest biomass harvesting on sustainability in the Alpine region. South-East European Forestry 6(1): 77-95. 2. Hagan J.M., Grove S.L. (1999): Coarse woody debris. Journal of Forestry 97: 6-11. 3. Hastik, R., Basso, S., Geitner, C., Haida, C., Poljanec, A., Portaccio, A., Vrščaj, B., Walzer, C. (2015): Renewable energies and ecosystem service impacts. Renewable & sustainable energy reviews, 48, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.004, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.004: 608-623. 4. Johann, E., (2007): Traditional forest management under the influence of science and industry: the story of the alpine cultural landscapes. Forest Ecology and Management 249, 54–62. 5. Masera, O., Ghilardi, A., Drigo, R., Trossero, M.A. (2006): WISDOM: A GIS-based supply demand mapping tool for woodfuel management. Biomass and Bioenergy 30: 618–637. 6. Poljanec, A., Pisek, R. (2013): Balancing biomass and biodiversity in protected areas; the Triglav National Park case study. Mid-term conference of recharge.green project, Brig (CH). 7. Poljanec, A., Gartner, A., Mlekuž, I., Jerala, B., Klopčič, M. (2015): Značilnosti gospodarjenja z gozdovi (in Slovene). In Poljanec & Solar (ed.), Gozdovi v Triglavskem narodnem parku; ekologija in upravljanje 8. SFS. (2014): National forest inventory data. Data from forest stands and compartments. Slovenian Forest Service. 9. Skoberne, P. (2015): Dolina Triglavskih jezer – od prispodobe konca sveta do narodnega parka (in Slovene). In Zorn e tal. (Ur.) Geografija Slovenije, 32 (in press). 10. Šolar, M. (2015): Triglavski narodni park; pomen in razvoj (in Slovene). In Poljanec & Solar (ed.), Gozdovi v Triglavskem narodnem parku; ekologija in upravljanje 11. Simončič, T., Gartner, A., Arih, A., Matijašić, D. (2015): Pomen in večnamenska raba gozdov (in Slovene). In Poljanec & Solar (ed.), Gozdovi v Triglavskem narodnem parku; ekologija in upravljanje

5.6 A best practice example from Slovenia that considers ecosystem services

As has been previously stated, including eco- for local biomass use, and so on. Possible system services in planning the use of natu- conflicts may arise between nature conser- ral resources is of paramount importance. vation and energy production, if for example Decisions on the use of a particular resource dead wood is removed from the forest, or can strongly influence other resources and large diameter trees are no longer promot- services that are connected. In the case of ed by management decisions. Dedicated the use of forest biomass, maximization of biomass plants may have a negative influ- the allowable cut could be most beneficial ence on recreation when operated in popu- for energy production, but if the importance lar touristic and recreational spots. Skidding of other ecosystem services is considered, trails can interfere with recreational paths. the sustainable energy potential would likely However, many of these possible trade-offs be lower. There are also other criteria be- can be prevented if conflicts are managed yond the amount of biomass extracted that sufficiently early and all relevant stakehold- can influence the ecosystem services in the ers are included in the decision-making pro- region, such as the type of harvesting and cess. skidding used, the technology for biomass production, whether or not a plant is buildt Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 107 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

In Slovenia, multi-objective forest manage- the provision of wood, biomass for energy, ment that considers a variety of forest eco- nature conservation, the protection of soil system services (in forestry, these are called and water, and recreation and other cultural forest functions) is legally recognized. For- services. Thirty-one stakeholders partici- est planning is an important tool to practice pated, including participants from the TNP, multi-objective forest management. It is the Forest Service (regional office in Bled), based on a participatory approach – differ- the Department of Forestry of the Biotech- ent forestry stakeholders have the right to nical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, participate in the process of plan revision. from various local touristic and sport organ- However, this participation is mainly limited izations, and representatives of forest own- to providing different spatial layers or plan- ers and harvesting organizations, grazing ning guidelines (e.g. for nature conservation communities, and some additional interest- agencies, hydrologists or for areas of cultur- ed individuals. The workshop was also a step al heritage), or for commenting on the final in the ongoing forest plan revision process draft of a plan (e.g. for forest owners and the of the forest management unit for Pokljuka general public). plateau..

In recharge.green, we tested a new approach The workshop followed a four-step process: of including stakeholders at the first stage of plan revision – when management objectives 1. Ranking of management objectives: are set and ranked, and priorities among for- Stakeholders were provided with a list est functions/services are set and spatially of management objectives (e.g. wood allocated. Such an approach would help to production, energy for biomass, 1) identify the main importance of forests tourism, recreation, nature in the region, 2) address possible conflicts conservation, preservation of cultural among forest users and 3) find solutions for heritage) and were individually asked planning forest uses that minimise trade- to prioritize them by allocating 100 offs between different ecosystem services. units among the listed objectives. The results showed that the production A workshop for local stakeholders was or- of high quality timber, nature ganized in the heart of Pokljuka region. The conservation and tourism and aim of the workshop was to discuss the recreation are the most important challenges for providing multiple ecosystem forest management objectives services on Pokljuka plateau in TNP including (Figure 5.6.1).

Figure 5.6.1: Ranked management objectives (left) and identification of conflicts regarding forest use (right). (Source: TNP) Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 108 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

2. Identification of conflicts; environmentalists, forest owners, Stakeholders individually identified others – e.g. pasture communities). the main conflicts they face regarding Each group received a map of the forest use on Pokljuka plateau. Later, Pokljuka plateau and stakeholders were all identified conflicts were compiled asked to indicate on the map where and jointly returned back to the their interests for ecosystem services stakeholders who ranked the conflicts appear (e.g. mark hiking or biking trails, from the least to the most urgent one. the most important places for tourism, quiet zones for habitats, etc.) 3. Spatial allocation of ecosystem (Figu re 5.6.2). The maps of the services: different groups were then compared Stakeholders were grouped in order to identify conflict areas. according to their preferences (4 groups: recreationalists,

Figure 5.6.2: Spatial allocation of ecosystem services (left) and finding solutions for conflict areas using H-method (right). (Source: TNP)

4. Finding solutions view, i.e. the entire group´s estimation The H method is a participatory method was determined democratically. In to determine individual attitudes of the end, the group made suggestions stakeholders towards a certain problem (up to three) on how to move the (FAO). In our case, participants at the group estimation towards a mark workshop were divided into four groups of 10, meaning how to improve the (three were related to specific conflict harmonisation between land uses, and areas, and an additional one to conflicts between various stakeholder demands. that were not spatially explicit). Each Group representatives presented the participant had to estimate on a scale main solutions, followed by a synthesis of 0 to 10 the consistency of land provided by forest planners. They use in certain conflict areas, where assessed how to continue with plan 0 represented very poor consistency revision and how to approach both and 10 represented very good land use spatially explicit and general problems harmonisation. All participants then regarding the use of ecosystem had to state up to three arguments services on Pokljuka plateau. The why they had not given a mark of 10 results will be highly valuable for or 0 (using sticky notes). Thereafter, revising forest plans and balancing the whole group sorted responses demands on multiple ecosystem into similar opinions. The next step services on Pokljuka plateau. was a determination of the collective Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 109 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Interview: A good forest management plan is the foundation for balancing energy use and nature

Mag. Janez Zafran, Head of Forestry Division, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, Slovenia

Question: In Triglav National Park forest bi- been discussed many times – at a political omass is the most used renewable energy as well as at a professional scale. There are source. How do you see the potential for fur- no unambiguous answers. The main direc- ther forest biomass use in Triglav National tion is clear and also agreed upon at an in- Park? ternational level: we have to halt the loss of Answer: From a general point of view the biodiversity and the degradation of ecosys- use of different renewable energy sources tems and ecosystem services. In Slovenian itself is not problematic. Looking at forests forests and forestry we have a long tradition and wood, there is a lot of potential in Tri- how to do forest management, which on the glav National Park and in Slovenia in general. one hand considers economic aspects, such Mag. Janez Zafran is Head of the For- When we talk about forest management we as the exploitation of forest resources, and estry Division of the Slovenian Minis- should not only focus on growing forests for which on the other hand respects biodiversi- try of Agriculture, Forestry and Food. energy use, but we have to talk about holistic ty and its needs. We see forest management He has over 20 years of experience in forestry. Before joining the Minis- forest management, based on the principles planning as the main instrument for the fu- try, he worked for the Slovenian For- of sustainability and the protection of biodi- ture. est Service and led the preparation, versity, considering also the multi-function- adoption and implementation of for- ality of the forest. Of course in sustainable Question: How can we preserve the func- est management plans. His expertise forest management a certain part of wood tioning of forest ecosystem services in Tri- lies in forest management planning, biomass can be considered appropriate for glav National Park? forest inventory and monitoring, forest sector planning and forest policy. energy use. Answer: A certain amount of attention and care is needed for any kind of change in Slo- Question: Triglav National Park is among venia’s only National Park. We have to be the oldest national parks in Europe; the first careful and ensure the acceptance of our protection designation dates back to 1924. decisions. For this we have to have a lot of Forest management also has a long tradi- basic knowledge on forest ecosystems ser- tion. Is a balance between energy and nature vices, we have to be able to communicate possible? with each other and to invite accountable Answer: The general contradiction between and public stakeholders. This is the only way the exploitation of natural resources for en- to achieve long-term acceptance among the ergy and the protection of biodiversity has majority of people living in this area. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 110 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.7 A best practice example from Bavaria that benefits fish populations

The hydropower plant Altusried in the pilot Package of measures directly referring to region Bavaria is situated at the river Iller. reference conditions Due to hydropower usage the Iller has a poor ●● Aim: optimization and creation of riv- ecological status with regard to the Euro- erine habitats, especially rearing- and pean Water Framework Directive. The most spawning habitats suitable for rhe- important parameter in this context is the ophilic species. fish population. The main areas of interest ●● Target Area: Head of the reservoir and are ecological connectivity at water-retain- riverine stretches downstream of the ing structures and the protection of the fish Altusried hydropower plant. population in accordance with the Directive. Proposed measures concern: The objective of the project was the devel- ●● gravel spawning grounds; opment of measures to improve fish popu- ●● vitalization of riverine habitats; lations in Alpine rivers in Bavaria (e. g. Iller, ●● connection of tributaries and backwa- Lech, Danube) to alleviate the negative im- ters. pacts of hydropower plants on river ecosys- Package of measures not referring to refer- tems. ence conditions The idea of the pilot activity was to carry out ●● Aim: optimization and creation of addi- a special monitoring of fish fauna at hydro- tional functional habitats inside the res- power plants and to optimize the construc- ervoir area (upstream of the hydropower tion and operation of existing hydropower plant) in order to create retreats during plants and fish passages in order to minimize hydropeaking. negative impacts on the fish population. In ●● Target area: From the Altusried hydro- the year 2014 ecological surveys were car- power plant to the head of the reservoir, ried out to determine the status quo and the area strongly influenced by hydropeak- deficits, and to gain a better understanding ing. of what measures are needed to improve the Proposed measures concern: situation. ●● fish rearing habitats; ●● fish retreat areas during floods; Observed deficits: ●● fish wintering sites. ●● The local fish population is dominated by With the proposed measures riverside hab- undemanding species (chub, stickleback itats, which do not develop naturally due to and stone loach). the lack of dynamic flow in the river, can be ●● There are severe deficits in the abun- newly created or restored. Since the situa- dance of rheophilic (preferring flowing tion at Altusried can be generally compared water) index species due to a low num- to other Alpine rivers the measures are suit- ber of or a complete absence of juve- able for other rivers as well. By realising and niles. maintaining the proposed measures, the Cause: ecological potential of the water body can be ●● There is a lack of functional spawning- significantly and sustainably improved. and rearing habitats. In addition, hydropeaking degrades the quality and availa- A detailed description of the observations bility of possible spawning- and rearing and the developed measures can be found habitats. in the (German language) report “Verbes- serung des ökologischen Potenzials der Iller Based on a comparison of the historic with am Kraftwerk Altusried” (BNGF, June 2015). the current situation, a catalogue of meas- Subsequent to the recharge.green project ures was developed: the implementation of the measures took place in the course of two example projects and building activities of the BEW. Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 111 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

At the beginning of the project there was where interested stakeholders as well takeholder S noticeable scepticism of nature conserva- as involved authorities were given the involvement tion organisations whether such measures opportunity to introduce their needs and should be financed by a project, as this nor- to make suggestions for the completion mally would have to be executed by the hy- of the project. dropower plant operator anyway. On the oth- ●● The results of the project – suggestions er hand, the participation of a private sector of measures to improve the fish ecolog- entity was felt to be desirable. ical potential of the Iller – were publicly presented at the final conference of re- The following dialogue process took place: charge.green during an excursion. ●● First, the intentions and questions of all involved parties as well as the course of Based on the experiences in the project it was cooperation within the project were dis- found that the mutual understanding of each cussed. other’s positions and aims was deepened ●● CIPRA was integrated / included by BEW and that faith in a dialogue based on fair and where the calls for proposals and alloca- cooperative communication was promoted. tions of fish ecological valuations were The greatest difficulty in the execution of concerned. the project was the tight time schedule. The ●● At the start of the evaluations and strat- coordination of the individual project steps egies a workshop comprising an excur- was considerably more time-consuming sion in the project area was held and the than expected. Enough time for a compre- working program was discussed. hensive and satisfactory exchange of con- ●● Before finalising the work, intermedi- tent specific questions should be allowed in ate results were presented at a meeting the future.

Further Reading 1. Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt (2008) Strategisches Durchgängigkeitskonzept Bayern. Sachstand und Ausblick. Download: https://www.lfu.bayern.de/wasser/wrrl/ beteiligung_oeffentlichkeit/doc/ 8_durchgaengigkeit.pdf 2. BNGF (2015): Verbesserung des ökologischen Potenzials der Iller am Kraftwerk Altusried. Büro für Naturschutz-, Gewässer- und Fischereifragen. 3. Hettrich, R.; Ruff, A (2011): Freiheit für das wilde Wasser. Status und Perspektiven nordalpiner Wildflusslandschaften aus naturschutzfachlier Sicht. WWF-Alpenflussstudie. WWF Deutschland. Download: http://www.wwf.de/fileadmin/ fm-wwf/Publikationen-PDF/Freiheit_fuer_das_Wilde_Wasser_-_Die_WWF- Alpenflussstudie.pdf 4. Grebmayer, T. (2010): Strategische Durchgängikeitskonzept Bayern. Dresdner Wasserbaukolloquim 2010. Download: http://vzb.baw.de/ publikationen/dresdner-wasserbauliche-mitteilungen/0/49%20Strategisches%20 Durchg%C3%A4ngigkeitskonzept%20Ba...pdf 5. Seifert, K. (2009): Durchgängigkeit der grossen Donau-Nebenflüsse. BNGF - Büro für Naturschutz-, Gewässer- und Fischereifragen. http://www.lfu.bayern.de/wasser/ wrrl/bewirtschaftungsplaene/ doc/bericht_nebenfluss.pdf Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 112 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Science: The Water Framework Directive

One of the dominant conflicts between re- document n°31 on Ecological Flows and in newable energy production and environmen- article 4(1) of the WFD, environmental flow is tal protection is the one between hydropow- defined as „a hydrological regime consistent er exploitation and the ecological status of with the achievement of the environmental rivers. Above all, protected areas are often objectives of the WFD in natural surface wa- rich in potential sites for hydropower gener- ter bodies“. The objectives of the WFD are the ation, but fragile ecosystems and areas with non-deterioration of the existing status and high habitat values have to be preserved. It the achievement of good ecological status in is obvious that increasing water diversions natural surface body. Regarding protected and uses can negatively alter the hydrolog- areas, the WFD points out the achievement ical, biological and morphological quality of and maintenance of standards designated the river. for the protection of water-dependent ecosystem. The case of heavily modified water The European Water Framework Directive bodies is different. Here the flow regime has (WFD) (2000/60/EC) aims to achieve a good to take into account the technical feasibili- ecological status for rivers in terms of bio- ty and the socio-economic aspects of water logical, hydrological and chemical charac- uses. In this case, the water flow has to be teristics. On the other hand, the Renewable defined differently. Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) promotes the use of renewable energy, and in the Eu- In addition, the WFD guidance documents ropean Alpine region the main renewable contain several recommendations for im- source of energy is hydropower. plementing ecological flow. Note that a good implementation of ecological flow requires a Pressures altering the flow regime, e.g. hy- significant amount of hydrological data. dropower uses and water diversions, affect the ecological status of a river. The water To be able to find a trade-off between re- quantity plays an important role in maintain- newable energy exploitation and ecosystem ing and achieving the desired „good status“ services preservation, data related to envi- of rivers and in enhancing the conservation ronmental flow are a mandatory input for the and the protection of habitats and species. r.green.hydro.legal modul (GRASS add-on). For this reason, the amount of water required Starting from this module, the hydropower for aquatic ecosystems to continue to thrive potential can be evaluated for both the deliv- and provide the services we rely upon, i.e. the ery of new permits and the review of existing environmental flow, has to be guarantee in water rights. rivers. As mentioned in the WFD guidance

Further Reading 1. EU Water Framework Directive. (2015): Ecological flows in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive. Technical Report - 2015 – 086, European Union. Download: https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/4063d635-957b-4b6f-bfd4- b51b0acb2570/ Guidance%20No%2031%20-%20Ecological%20flows%20%28 final%20version%29.pdf 2. Collection of WFD Guidance Documents. Download: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ water/water-framework/facts_figures/guidance_docs_en.htm Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 113 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 5.8 The potential for developing renewable energy in Leiblachtal, Vorarlberg

The pilot area Leiblachtal (“Leiblach val- cies composition, mixed forests cover 1,880 ley”) lies in the most north-western part of ha, pure conifer forests cover 429 ha, while Vorarlberg (Austria) on the border to Germa- pure broadleaved forests cover the remain- ny. With a number of five municipalities (Lo- ing 188 ha in the lower valley area. Lei- chau, Hörbranz, Hohenweiler, Möggers and blachtal is socio-economically character- Eichenberg), approximately 15,000 inhab- ized by moderate tourism, work migration itants and a size of 50 km2, the Leiblachtal to the nearby urbanized area of Rheintal and is the smallest pilot Area in this study. The forestry and agricultural activities in smaller main land uses are as follows: 48.9% for- villages. Like in many parts of the Alps, hy- ests (2,497 ha), 39.5% grasslands (2,017), dropower and biomass the most important 4.1% agricultural crops (208 ha) and 7.5% renewable energy types in Vorarlberg. How- urban area (381 ha). With regard to forests, ever, the Leiblachtal region has only limited the main forest types are Norway spruce, hydropower potential (Figure 5.8.1). There- silver fir and European beech mixed forests fore, alternative renewable energy sources (75.3%), followed by pure Norway spruce such as wind power and forest biomass are forests (13.6%) and the mixed broadleaves under intense discussion to meet regional coppices (4.5%). Considering the tree spe- energy demands.

Figure 5.8.1: Potential further development of renewable energy in Leiblachtal (Source: EURAC)

The impacts of renewable energy on the en- imports were not considered due to their vironment for the most critical development minimal spatial impacts. The Sample Hec- scenarios were assessed with the Sample tare (SH) approach uses exemplary pattern Hectare approach. (For further details see hectares and the following renewable energy chapter 3.7 on the Sample Hectare method scenarios: or “Musterhektar” booklet, available on the recharge.green website). The analysis was ●● Photovoltaic roof surfaces, carried out only for the production of energy ●● Use of grassland for livestock, exploita- from renewable sources. The use of air heat, tion of liquid manure for biogas, combined heat power generation, or energy Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 114 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

●● Energy maize and energy grass recovery Currently, the Sample Hectare approach in biogas plant, does not consider energy saving or the fol- ●● Open landscape photovoltaic, lowing renewable energy sources: ●● Planting energy wood, ●● Hydropower plant ●● Maximizing timber harvesting, ●● Hydroelectric storage power plant ●● Plantation energy, ●● Geothermal energy ●● Construction of wind power plant.

Decision makers and experts from public au- any additional restrictions - blue colour esults R thorities such as government departments in figures 5.8.2 to 5.8.7) for urban and rural planning or agriculture 2. Grassland with high yields combined were invited as “test persons” for the Sam- with landscape photovoltaic. ple Hectaremethod. Relevant stakeholders (A ground-mounted photovoltaic sys- from district authorities responsible for ag- tem on stilts that allows grazing for riculture, forestry, hunting and fishing; na- sheep, goats and cattle - green colour in ture and environmental protection; environ- figures 5.8.2 to 5.8.7) mental and food safety; water management; 3. Grassland with high yields combined and economics, energy and climate protec- with energy maize for biogas plants. tion were also invited. (Yellow colour in figures 5.8.2 to 5.8.7) 4. Grassland with high yields combined The following sample hectares and scenari- with energy crop plants (wood) for bi- os were chosen because of actual relevance: ogas plants. (Brown colour in figures 5.8.2 to 5.8.7) 1. Good accessible forest combined with wind power plant Figures 5.8.2 to 5.8.7 show the given feed- (Wind turbine with a hub height of 140 back of test persons by pointing out the ef- m, due to the necessary clearances, fect of each development scenario on given eight more sample hectares of forest ecosystem services. Socio-economic ef- are affected around the site. The forest fects were not analysed. around the wind turbine runs without

improved Figure 5.8.2: 60% Perceived impact of different scenarios on landscape and recreation 40% (Source: Regionalentwicklung impair 20% serve Vorarlberg eGen)

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. wood yield hinder neutral Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 115 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

improved Figure 5.8.3: 60% Perceived impact of different scenarios on basis of life for water, air 40% (Source: Regionalentwicklung 20% serve Vorarlberg eGen) impair

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. wood yield hinder neutral

improved Figure 5.8.4: 60% Perceived impact of different scenarios on habitat and diversity of plants and 40% animals (Source: Regionalentwicklung impair 20% serve Vorarlberg eGen) 0%

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. wood yield hinder neutral

improved 60% Figure 5.8.5: Perceived impact of different scenarios on protection 40% against natural hazards (Source: 20% serve Regionalentwicklung impair Vorarlberg eGen) 0%

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. hinder neutral wood yield Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 116 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

improved Figure 5.8.6: 60% Perceived impact of different scenarios on production of raw materials 40% (Source: Regionalentwicklung 20% serve Vorarlberg eGen) impair 0%

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. wood yield hinder neutral

improved Figure 5.8.7: 60% Perceived impact of different scenarios on reduction in greenhouse gases and global 40% warming (Source: 20% serve Regionalentwicklung impair Vorarlberg eGen) 0%

wind turbine PV-surface plant energy maize forest max. wood yield hinder neutral

The Sample Hectare approach has clear ad- ● The positive impression of a landscape imitations of the ● L vantages, but also some limitations. results from a mosaic of different land- approach and possible scape patches. Changes of landscape extensions ●● The consideration of the individual sam- patterns often make an area attractive. ple hectares in isolation from the surrounding environment does not corre- The relationships of sample hectares to spond to the complex spatial reality. neighbouring areas should be involved in the ●● Landscape changes in the vicinity of assessment, although this can’t be stand- settlements have to be assessed differ- ardized. One option might be to integrate a ently from those in remote areas. “scarcity value” for the sample hectares or a ●● The ecosystem services of an area degree of diversity. can’t be considered in isolation from the neighbouring areas. E.g. the loss of In addition to the impact of renewable en- one hectare of forest has a small effect ergy to neighbouring areas, the so-called when surrounding forest dominates the “long distance effect” of renewable energy wider area. should be considered. Currently this effect is Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 117 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

not represented through the selective per- sired services is difficult in a highly complex ception of the sample hectares. This “long system. distance effect” of renewable energy is ex- The Sample Hectare-approach has its lim- tremely large for wind turbines, smaller for itations when it comes to energy sources photovoltaic systems and hardly exists for with linear characteristics such as hydro- biomass utilization. power. In addition, the approach doesn’t consider the use of geothermal energy or The multiple use of a landscape is current- groundwater heat. ly not considered in the assessment of the Sample Hectare approach: e.g. a landscape Another point is the gap between the actual that combines the use of wind power, bio- demand and the real price to be paid for eco- mass and solar energy. In such an instance, system services. A forest near a settlement the energy output and social benefits would can be more valuable to people due to higher be much higher. demand than an ecologically valuable forest further away. What we have left out of the Ecosystem services are in a reciprocal rela- discussion here completely are the limits of tionship in which they strengthen or weaken individual (economic) assessments of eco- each other. The maximization of all the de- system services.

Further Reading 1. Amt der Vorarlberger Landesregierung (2010). Energiezukunft Vorarlberg – Ergebnisse aus dem Visionsprozess. 2. Amt der Vorarlberger Landesregierung (2011). Schritt für Schritt zur Energieautonomie in Vorarlberg. 101 enkeltaugliche Maßnahmen. 3. Regionalentwicklung Vorarlberg eGen (2015) Musterhektar. Beschreibung der Methode und Anwendung. http://www.heimaten.com/downloads/publikationen/2015 Methode Musterhektar.pdf Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 118 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5 Best practice example: Free and open source software in research projects

Stallman provides a definition of free and that can be used and improved by all the open source software (FOSS) that is based stakeholders involved in the decision mak- on four main freedoms (GNU, The Free Soft- ing process. This process can help also the ware Definition, 2015). The freedom to run stakeholders to be conscious of the techni- the program as you wish, for any purpose cal issues and can actively help to fill model (freedom 0), to study how the program gaps or refine input data. The tools can also works (access to the code), and change it so be used inside an education program to help it does your computing as you wish (freedom students to consider different aspects and 1), to redistribute copies (freedom 2) and impacts of the trade-off between Energy distribute copies of your modified versions and Environment issues. (freedom 3). All the software that has been developed by The use of FOSS in science is considered a EURAC and UNITN within the recharge.green priority in science to fully guarantee the re- project is available as a GRASS add-ons producibility of the research work. Software and it is available to be tested, scrutinized errors can undermine heavily the scientific and improved. All the code has been writ- results of a research. Things are even worst ten in a team with a peer-reviewed process if we accept the idea that: “Data is code and to improve the readability, maintainability code is data” (John D. Cook Data, code, and and quality of the code. Another important regulation, 28 May 2015) and this is why of- aspect to consider is that inserting this set ten release the software is not enough, it is of tools in the grass-add-ons repository we also required to release an usable and testa- are enlarging our small team to an active and ble data set (Open Data). more wide community of user and developers that it is using, maintaining and develop- This approach provides many benefits also ing the platform since 1982. within a research projects such as recharge. green. The availability of the tools as FOSS Open the tools developed within a research guarantees the freedom to use and test the project improve the involvement and the code in different contexts and areas and to participation of the stakeholders and in- adapt or enlarge the software capabilities crease the potential impacts of the project. to take into account different factors, algo- Make it easier to use the outcomes of this rithms and methodologies. Facilitating the project as a starting point for others. For ex- adoption of these tools for future research ample, an early version of the tool was fund- projects. ed by the BIOMASFOR project co-funded by The tools can be integrated in web-plat- the CARITRO Foundation through grant No. forms to provide services to regional or local 101. The first version was focused to assess municipalities opening new business oppor- the energy potential of forestry biomass tunities for start-ups or companies. residues. The recharge.green project helps us to extend the tools and to assess the en- The openness of the software facilitates the ergy potential of other renewable sources link and collaborations with other institutes like: small/mini hydro, solar and wind power and stakeholders interested on the topic. plants. Furthermore open the tools and data used In conclusion if tools are released and pub- to analyse a certain problem significantly lished as FOSS, the end of the project could improves the transparency of the whole pro- represent the beginning of a new process cess to the stakeholders. In case of conflicts that involves several stakeholders and insti- between the stakeholders on interests, views tutions. and priorities we provide a neutral platform Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 5. Rene wa ble energ y e xploi tat ion a nd ecos ys t em ser v ices / 119 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

Further Reading 1. Chemin Y. et al. (2015): GRASS GIS: a peer-reviewed scientific platform and future research EGU European Geosciences Union General Assembly 12 – 17 April 2015, Vienna, Austria 2. David A. W. Soergel (2014): Rampant software errors undermine scientific results. F1000Research 2014, 3:303 3. Lees, J.M. (2012): Open and free: Software and scientific reproducibility. Seismol. Res. Lett. 2012, 83, 751–752. 4. Petras, V. et al. (2015): Integrating Free and Open Source Solutions into Geospatial Science Education. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2015, 4, 942-956. 5. Cook, J. D. (2015): Data, code, and regulation. 28 May 2015. http://www. johndcook.com/blog/ 2015/05/28/data-code-and-regulation/ 6. GRASS GIS 7 Addons Manual pages. https://grass.osgeo.org/grass70/manuals/ addons/. Keyword: r.green 7. GRASS GIS history. https://grass.osgeo.org/home/history/ 8. GNU, The Free Software Definition (2015) https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 1/2/3 Sus ta in a ble Rene wa ble Energ y Pl a nning in t he A lps / 120 Ta bl e of C on t e n t s 4/5

– balancing Alpine energy recharge.green and nature

The Alps have great potential for the use of this process. The project ran from October renewable energy. Thereby they can make a 2012 to June 2015 and was co-financed by valuable contribution to mitigating climate the European Regional Development Fund in change. This, however, means increasing the frame of the European Territorial Coop- pressures on nature. What could be the im- eration Programme Alpine Space. pact of such changes on the habitats of animals and plants? How do they affect land This handbook provides detailed insights use and soil quality? How much renewable about sustainable renewable energy plan- energy can reasonably be used? The project ning in the Alps for experts and decision recharge.green brought together 16 part- makers. ners to develop strategies and tools for decision making on such issues. The analysis Together with other project publica- and comparison of the costs and benefits of tions, it can be downloaded from www.re- renewable energy, ecosystem services, and charge-green.eu potential trade-offs was a key component in

Agroscope

ISBN: 978-3-200-04346-6