The Relationship Between the Ecological Network and the Water System in the Carpathian Basin Finding a Way for Sustainable Land Use
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In our research we dealt with the relationship between the water system (including both the groundwater bodies and the surface waters), the ecological network and land use. Our primary goal was to compare the agricultural suitability to conservation areas, which can provide a framework for sustainable land use in a national-international scale. Our research took place in the Carpathian basin, so that we could observe broader, more comprehensive correlations between the researched aspects at the water catchment area.
We explored the landscape and environmental features of the Carpathian Basin and then analyzed them with the help of GIS methods. We analyzed three different feature categories: the first aspect was water presence and protection, the second was the current land cover, and the third was the Natura 2000 network as a habitat-system and biodiversity protection element. Data collection was obstructed by the fact that the catchment-based study area belongs to 9 countries, only a part of which are EU member states, so we could not rely on EU databases (e.g. CORINE land cover). Based on the available data, we performed GIS analyses, which revealed the common values and dilemmas of the three different aspects.
Based on our results, it was possible to define the areas that adapt to the landscape function but are primarily suitable for cultivation (either arable land, grassland or forestry), the habitats that are sensitive from a natural point of view, and the transitional areas located between them. Our results suggest that the management between these two fields are not cooperating currently. Agricultural land could play a significant role in the joint development in the future, since these areas struggle with both floods and droughts and also with maintaining biodiversity.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
x
References
Bak, B., Bartholy, J., Berecz, A., Bada, G. 2010. …. in Karátson D. (ed.) Magyarország földje, Pannon Enciklopédia
Bartholy, J., Pongracz, R., Torma, Cs., Pieczka I., Kardos, P., Hunyady, A. 2009. Analysis of regional climate change modelling experiments for the Carpathian Basin. International Journal of Global Warming Vol. 1, No. 1–3, DOI: 10.1504/IJGW.2009.027092
Bennett, G., Wit, P.D. 2001. The development and application of ecological networks: a review of proposals, plans and programmes. IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature. AIDEnvironment, NL, IUCN. Online available at https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1371833/the-development-and-application-of-ecological-networks/1986007/. CID: 20.500.12592/qp1g2g
Bennett, G., Mulongoy, K.J. 2006. Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Montreal, Technical Series No. 23, ISBN: 92-9225-042-6
de Boer, C., Bressers, H. 2012. River renaturalization as strategy for ecological networks, in: Marschall I., Müller M., Gather M. 2012: The Green Belt as a European Ecological Network - strengths and gaps. Berichte des Instituts Verkehr und Raum Band 10 (2012) ISSN 1868-8586
CEEWeb for Biodiversity 2019. Natura 2000 and Water Management. Online available at https://www.ceeweb.org/ducuments/ publications/Natura_2000_and_Water_Management.pdf
De Montis ,A., Bardi, M.A., Ganciu, A., Ledda, A., Caschili, S., Mulas, M., Dessena, L., Modica, G., Laudari, L., Fichera, C.R. 2014. Landscape planning and ecological networks. A Rural System in, TeMA. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment DOI:10.6092/1970-9870/2485
Fath, B.D., Scharler, U.M., Ulanowicz, R.E., Hannon, B. 2007. Ecological network analysis: network construction. Ecological Modelling 208(2007), 49–55, DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.04.029
Burdziej, J. 2019. Using hexagonal grids and network analysis for spatial accessibility assessment in urban environments – a case study of public amenities in Toruń. Miscellanea Geographica Vol. 23(2), 99–110. DOI: 10.2478/mgrsd-2018-0037
European Commission, Directorate General Environment 2012. Implementation of Article 6(4), first subparagraph, of Council Directive 92/43/EEC (Habitat Directive). Online available at https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-biodiversity/habitats-directive_en
Feng, H., Li, Y., Li, Y., Li, N., Li, Y., Hu, Y., Yu, J., Luo, H. 2021. Identifying and evaluating the ecological network of Siberian roe deer (Capreolus pygargus) in Tieli Forestry Bureau, northeast China. Global Ecology and Conservation 26(2021) e01477 DOI: 10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01477.
Gábris, Gy. 2000. Európa Regionális Földrajza I. – Természetföldrajz. ELTE Eötvös Kiadó
Graves, T.A., Farley, S., Goldstein, M.I., Servheen, C. 2007. Identification of functional corridors with movement characteristics of brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska. Landscape Ecol Vol. 22, 765–772. DOI: 10.1007/s10980-007-9082-x
Godfrey, M. 2015. Reducing Ecological Impacts of Shale Development. The Nature Conservancy. Online available at https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/Shale_Development_Recommended_Practices.pdf
Kuglerová, L, Ågren, A., Jansson, A., Laudon, H. 2014. Towards optimizing riparian buffer zones: Ecological and biogeochemical implications for forest management. Forest Ecology and Management 334, 74–84. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.08.033
Kertész, Á. 2011. Táj- és környezettervezés. Eszterházy Károly Főiskola
Konkolyné Gyuró, É. 2003. Környezettervezés. Mezőgazda Lap- és Könyvkiadó Kft., Budapest, ISBN: 9632861078
Kovács, P. 2019. Vízjárástípusok és a vízjárás stabilitása a Duna vízgyűjtőterületén: Doctoral dissertation, Budapest, Online available at https://teo.elte.hu/minosites/ertekezes2009/ kovacs_p.pdf
Meier, K., Kuusemets, V., Luig, J., Mander, Ü. 2005. Riparian buffer zones as elements of ecological networks: Case study on Parnassius mnemosyne distribution in Estonia. Ecological Engineering 24, 531–537. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.01.017
Kutnyánszky, V., Szilvácsku, M.Zs. 2023. Relationship Between Landscape Management, Land Use and Ecological Network in Nagykörű. Environmental Geography Vol.16. No. 1–4. 107–118. DOI: 10.14232/jengeo-2023-44682
Jongman, R.H.G., Külvik, M., Kristiansen, I. 2004. European ecological networks and greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning 68, 305–319. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00163-4
Jongman, R.H.G., Veen, P. 2007. Ecological networks across Europe. Zeist, the Netherlands, KNNV, pp. 141–168. ISBN (Print) 9789050112574
Jongman, R.H.G., Bouwma, I.M., Griffioen, A., Jones-Walters, L., Van Doorn, A.M. 2011. The Pan European Ecological Network: PEEN. Landscape Ecol Vol. 26, 311–326. DOI: 10.1007/s10980-010-9567-x
Jongman, R.H.G. 2012. Ecological networks: A society approach for biodiversity conservation. in: Marschall, I., Müller, M., Gather, M. (eds.) 2012. The Green Belt as a European Ecological Network - strengths and gaps. Berichte des Instituts Verkehr und Raum Band 10, ISSN 1868-8586
Linehan, J., Gross, M., Finn, J. 1995. Greenway planning: developing a landscape ecological network approach. Landscape and Urban Planning 33, 179–193. DOI: 10.1016/0169-2046(94)02017-A
Mander, Ü., Külvik, M., Jongman, R.H.G. 2003. Scaling in territorial ecological networks. Landschap: tijdschrift voor landschapsecologie en milieukunde 20 (2003)2. ISSN 0169-6300, pp. 113–127.
Nucci, A., Angiolin, C., Manolaki, P., Vogiatzakis, I.N. 2022. An integrated approach to support a river ecological network: A case study from the Mediterranean. Land Use Policy 119, 106217 DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106217
Opdam, P., Steingrover, E., van Rooij, S. 2006. Ecological networks: A spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 75, 322–332. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.015
Roekaerts, M., Opermanis, O. 2018. Status of the Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest (ASCI) in 2018. Convention on the conservation of European Wildlife and Natural habitats, T-PVS/PA (2018) 11 p.
Rinaldo, R., Gattoc, M., Rodriguez-Iturbed, I. 2018. River networks as ecological corridors: A coherent ecohydrological perspective. Advances in Water Resources 112, 27–58. DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2017.10.005
Timár, G., Jakab, G., Székely, B. 2024. A Step from Vulnerability to Resilience: Restoring the Landscape Water-Storage Capacity of the Great Hungarian Plain - An Assessment and a Proposal. Land 13(2), 146. DOI: 10.3390/land13020146
van der Sluis, T., Chardon, J.P. 2001. How to define European ecological networks. Transactions on Ecology and the Environment Vol.46, WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541
Water Framework Directive. Online available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060)
Werners, S.A., Szalai, S., Zingstra, H., Kőpataki, É., Beckmann, A., Bos, E., Civic, K., Hlásny, T., Hulea, O., Juerk, M., Koch, H., Kondor, A.Cs., Kovbasko, A., Lakatos, M., Lambert, S., Peters, R., Trombik, J., van de Velde, I., Zsuffa, I. 2016. Climate Change Adaptation in the Carpathian Mountain Region, Climate Change Adaptation Strategies – An Upstream-downstream Perspective. Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-40773-9_5
Databases
International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR). Online available at https://www.icpdr.org/ (downloaded: 1.10.2024.)
GLC 2013 (Global Land Cover) – Copernicus Global Land Service. Online available at https://land.copernicus.eu/en/products/global-dynamic-land-cover (downloaded: 1.15.2024.)
OpenStreetMap – Geofabrik. Online available at https://download.geofabrik.de/