18/07/2013

Lien Poelmans1, Inge Uljee1, Maarten Hens2, Ward Verhaeghe3, Valérie Goethals3 and Guy Engelen1

1Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Boeretang 200, B-2400 Mol (www.vito.be) 2Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO), Kliniekstraat 25, B-1070 Brussels (www.inbo.be) 3Agency for Nature and Forest (ANB), Koning Albert II-laan 20 box 8, B-1000 Brussels (www.natuurenbos.be)

A spatial optimisation tool to support the implementation of the biodiversity policy in Flanders Belgium

18/07/2013 2 © 2013, VITO NV

Problem definition

» European biodiversity policy:

» EU-member states have to ensure the favourable state of biodiversity on their territories;

» Natura2000 is cornerstone of biodiversity policy;

» 2 Directives: Bird Directive – Habitat Directive:

» Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) have been delineated and institutionally anchored in policy documents;

» Flanders is implementing the necessary measures:

» The necessary research has been carried out to define the habitat types and species that occur in Flanders;

» Critical parameters/indicators defining a favourable conservation status (FCS) for all habitat types/species were determined;

» Participative approach: administration, stakeholders and scientists.

18/07/2013 3 © 2013, VITO NV

Biodiversity in Flanders

Contiguous Open spaces 2050

Antwerpen

Mechelen

Brussel

St. Niklaas

Gent

Aalst

Leuven

Brugge

Hasselt

Kortrijk

Turnhout

» Limited: 38 SACs, 104888 ha;

» Strongly fragmented: some 400 sub-zones;

» Under severe pressure because of urbanization and agricultural activity;

» Some 46 habitat types of European importance and 12 ‘regionally important biotopes’ (total around 44000ha within SACs);

» To be managed by Agency for Nature and Forest;

» Closely watched by: Nature conservation NGO’s, farmers, industry, land owners, infrastructure and public works, drinking water companies, etc.

» Biodiversity policy is implemented in phases: regional targets have been fixed. Targets at the level of the SAC sub-zones were to be determined

» The participatory process involves 6 working groups. The calibration workgroup is to ensure the allocation of habitats to SAC sub-zones consistent with regional targets.

18/07/2013 4 © 2013, VITO NV

Project objectives

» Support determination of the local biodiversity targets: 45600ha of 46 different habitat types in 400 SAC sub-zones covering 104888 ha in total;

» Develop, implement and apply a suitable optimisation methodology. Support and take part in the participatory process;

» Ensure that decision becomes law and can be voted within set time frame;

» Project started 1st June 2012, law voted on 15th February 2013.

18/07/2013 5 © 2013, VITO NV

Allocation module

• Generates alternative allocations of habitats to SAC (sub-) zones;

RuimteModel

• Spatial allocation of habitats in SAC (sub-)zones at 1ha resolution;

• Computes spatially-explicit indicators

Evaluation/Optimisation module

• Computes utility function based on indicators from RuimteModel;

• Applies Genetic Algorithm on the alternative allocations;

• Informs the Allocation module about new genes;

• Stops the search process and delivers final results.

Optimisation tool: Technical implementation

18/07/2013 6 © 2013, VITO NV

Allocation module

D

Actual habitats Consensus Constraints Total targets

+ = +

To be optimised

+

∑ to be realized ∑ actual habitats ∑ consensus ∑ constraints ∑ to be optimised

Weighted characteristics of SAC per Habitat

e.g. suitability, presence, … ‘Iterative proportional fitting’

?

To be allocated by

RuimteModel

∑ to be optimised

genetic algorithm generates candidate solutions for allocation

∑ to be optimised

Weight character. 1

Weight character. 2

Weight character. 3

Weight character. 4

18/07/2013 7 © 2013, VITO NV

Characteristic: Average suitability per habitat

» Habitat: 2310_2330 (dry sand heaths and inland dunes)

<10 10-20 20-30 30-50 >50

Antwerpen

Mechelen

Brussel

St. Niklaas

Gent

Aalst

Leuven

Brugge

Hasselt

Kortrijk

Turnhout

18/07/2013 9 © 2013, VITO NV

Characteristic: Flemish Ecological Network (FEN)

» Areal extent of the SAC (sub)-zone in FEN

» The higher, the more interesting for forest targets

<20% 20-40 40-60 60-80 >80%

Antwerpen

Mechelen

Brussel

St. Niklaas

Gent

Aalst

Leuven

Brugge

Hasselt

Kortrijk

Turnhout

18/07/2013 10 © 2013, VITO NV

Characteristic: Agricultural land value

» The higher, the less valuable for farming, the more available for habitats

<2 2-4 4-6 6-8 >8

Antwerpen

Mechelen

Brussel

St. Niklaas

Gent

Aalst

Leuven

Brugge

Hasselt

Kortrijk

Turnhout

18/07/2013 12 © 2013, VITO NV

Allocation module

• Generates alternative allocations of habitats to SAC (sub-) zones;

RuimteModel

• Spatial allocation of habitats in SAC (sub-)zones at 1ha resolution;

• Computes spatially-explicit indicators

Evaluation/optimisation module

• Computes utility function based on indicators from RuimteModel;

• Applies Genetic Algorithm on the alternative allocations;

• Informs the Allocation module about new genes;

• Stops the search process and delivers final results.

optimisation tool: Technical implementation

Confidential – © 2009, VITO NV – All rights reserved

Cellular Automata

Land use dynamics

at Cell level 1 ha (1,375,000)

Spatial agents search for location

based on individual preferences

Individual choices change the

overall spatial structure

800 m

Local level

Habitat 1

Habitat …

Habitat N

Agriculture Urban Habitat 1 Habitat … Habitat N

Ecological knowledge INBO

RuimteModel: Constrained Cellular Automata (White, Engelen, Uljee, 1993; EU-JRC MOLAND, 2007)

Confidential – © 2009, VITO NV – All rights reserved

RuimteModel: Constrained Cellular Automata (White, Engelen, Uljee, 1993; EU-JRC MOLAND, 2007)

18/07/2013 14

Cellular Automata

Land use dynamics

at Cell level 1 ha (1,375,000)

Zoning & legislation

Physical suitability

Quasi-static cell characteristics

Local level

To be allocated

by RuimteModel

areas from

allocation

module

Regional level

18/07/2013 15 © 2013, VITO NV

Land-use map (initial state)

18/07/2013 16 © 2013, VITO NV

Suitability – physical-ecological potential

» Computed by means of POTNAT-model (INBO)

eg. Wet heaths (4010_7150)

18/07/2013 18 © 2013, VITO NV

» Maps (per habitat type) defining areas where the habitat is forbidden or impossible, including:

» Areas zoned for: residential, community facilities and public usage, services, industry, SME’s, mining, infrastructure, recreation;

» Areas designated for agricultural usage in areas zoned for agriculture;

» Protected landscape / designated heritage landscape which protection requirements impeding the realization of habitat types;

» Pipelines of NATO / Fluxys / high voltage lines, etc. impeding forest development.

Zoning and legislation

Antwerpen

Mechelen

Brussel

St. Niklaas

Gent

Aalst

Leuven

Brugge

Hasselt

Kortrijk

Turnhout

18/07/2013 19 © 2013, VITO NV

Indicators – constraints in order to achieve a FCS & stakeholder’s optimisation criteria

» Compute spatial indicators representing constraints of the Habitat Directive and optimisation criteria defined by stakeholders

Specific constraint S3

Specific constraint S2

Specific constraint S1

Generic optimisation need G2

Generic optimisation need G1

Hard constraint C2

Hard constraint C1

18/07/2013 20 © 2013, VITO NV

Constraints imposed from Habitat Directive

» 75% of the total regional habitat surface in an good local conservation state (cluster area > minimum surface for optimal conservation);

» Reference range for habitat types should be stable or increased;

» Reference range for Habitat Directive species should be stable or increased;

» Contribution to regional conservation status should be proportional to the importance of the SAC-(sub-)zone in the Natura2000 network;

» Absolute standstill for actual habitat types.

18/07/2013 21 © 2013, VITO NV

Favourable Reference Range for habitat types

» Natural range for habitat types needs to be stable or increasing

» In each 10 x 10km grid located in the fringe of the natural range of a habitat type, where a SAC (sub-)zone is present, there should be at least one cluster of the habitat type with a minimum surface area for optimal conservation (e.g. 5ha for habitat type 2310_2330)

» E.g. Reference Range for dry sand heath/inland dunes (2310_2330)

18/07/2013 22 © 2013, VITO NV

Optimisation criteria Generic optimisation criteria (agreed upon by all stakeholders)

» Maximum targets in areas managed/owned by ANB and approved nature conservation NGO’s;

» Minimum environmental and transformation costs (implemented in socio-economic and ecological suitability maps and interaction rules);

» Maximum targets in areas with occurrence of typical species

Stakeholder specific optimisation criteria

1. Maximum targets for open habitats and alluvial forests in perimeters of approved nature conservation NGO’s;

2. Minimum forest targets in areas with a high concentration of red list species that can not survive in forest;

3. Minimum targets on plots with high agricultural value;

4. Minimum targets near farm buildings;

5. Minimum water-related targets in drinking water pumping zones;

6. Minimum water/N-related targets near industrial sites;

7. Maximum targets for forest conversion and expansion within FEN zones;

8. Minimum targets in park areas and near protected monuments.

18/07/2013 23 © 2013, VITO NV

Maximum targets in areas managed/owned by ANB and approved nature conservation NGO’s

» Proportions of terrains managed/owned by ANB and approved nature conservation NGO’s occupied by habitat types

» Input: Terrains owned/managed by ANB

18/07/2013 24 © 2013, VITO NV

Minimum targets on plots with high agricultural value

» Weighted average: (area of agricultural plots occupied by habitat types* score) / total area of agricultural plots

» Input: Agricultural value map

18/07/2013 25 © 2013, VITO NV

Minimum water-related targets in drinking water pumping zones

» Weighted average: (area pumping zones occupied by habitat types* depth of cone of depression) / total area of influence

» Input: Isolines cones of depression

18/07/2013 26 © 2013, VITO NV

Allocation module

• Generates alternative allocations of habitats to SAC (sub-) zones;

RuimteModel

• Spatial allocation of habitats in SAC (sub-)zones at 1ha resolution;

• Computes spatially-explicit indicators

Evaluation/optimisation module

• Computes utility function based on indicators from RuimteModel;

• Applies Genetic Algorithm on the alternative allocations;

• Informs the Allocation module about new genes;

• Stops the search process and delivers final results.

optimisation tool: Technical implementation

18/07/2013 27 © 2013, VITO NV

Receives all criteria scores computed by RuimteModel

Computes goal function Ui

Maximises goal function Ui

Assessment & optimisation module

cellsall

iU cellsall

* cellsall

a*

edstandardisandnormalisedareG and Scriteriaon Optimizati

met;not isk contraint ifC

met; isk contraint if 0C

criteriaon optimizati generic ofnumber the toequal m :with1/m ω...βα

criteriaon optimizati specific ofnumber the toequaln :with1/n z...cba

:With

)*...**(**...***...

k

k

212121

mmni GGGSzSbSaCCCU

18/07/2013 28 © 2013, VITO NV

Assessment & optimisation module

» Goal function evolves to maximum

18/07/2013 29 © 2013, VITO NV

Results

» Maps showing the habitat types at 1ha resolution

18/07/2013 30 © 2013, VITO NV

e.g. SAC BE2100040– habitat 91E0 – current situation

Habitat meets criterion B-status and A-status;

Habitat meets B-status, NOT A-status;

Habitat does NOT meet B-status, NOR A-status

Part of cluster related habitats that meets A-status

Part of cluster-related habitats that does NOT meet A-status

18/07/2013 31 © 2013, VITO NV

e.g. SAC BE2100040– habitat 91E0 – optimised situation

Habitat meets criterion B-status and A-status;

Habitat meets B-status, NOT A-status;

Habitat does NOT meet B-status, NOR A-status

Part of cluster related habitats that meets A-status

Part of cluster-related habitats that does NOT meet A-status

18/07/2013 32 © 2013, VITO NV

Results

» Maps showing the habitat types at 1ha resolution

» Target area per habitat type:

» For each SAC zone and SAC sub-zone;

» Expansion vs. transformation of habitats;

18/07/2013 33 © 2013, VITO NV

E.g. SAC BE2100040 – total area per sub-zone Subzone 2310/2330 4010 4030

Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot

1 45 50 261 68 113 0 0 669 1 1 0 0 433 0 0

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 1 1 0 0 73 0 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0

4 15 10 258 47 62 0 0 363 2 2 0 0 254 0 0

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 4 0 0

6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 286 1 2 6 0 224 0 6

7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 102 1 2 2 0 61 0 2

Subzone 6230 6510 91E0

Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot

1 0 0 1239 0 0 5 0 199 1 6 60 0 1174 11 71

2 0 0 154 0 0 2 0 220 13 15 54 0 296 0 54

3 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 71 0 0 3 0 82 0 3

4 0 0 572 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 12 0 455 14 26

5 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 0 7 7 11

6 6 19 344 29 35 2 0 37 0 2 67 0 121 121 188

7 2 0 171 1 3 0 0 31 0 0 60 0 72 37 97

Subzone 9160 9120/9190 7140

Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot Act Min Max Extra Tot

1 0 0 574 0 0 12 60 1333 65 77 20 0 41 20 40

2 10 0 69 0 10 40 0 143 57 97 0 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 146 0 0 10 0 552 7 17 3 0 0 0 3

5 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6 0 0 286 0 0 19 10 334 40 59 1 0 3 3 4

7 6 0 100 0 6 86 0 155 100 186 1 0 1 1 2

18/07/2013 34 © 2013, VITO NV

Results

» Maps showing the habitat types at 1ha resolution

» Target area per habitat type:

» For each SAC zone and SAC sub-zone;

» Expansion vs. transformation of habitats;

» Impact of final solution on generic and specific optimisation criteria:

» Optimised indicator values for whole of Flanders;

» Spatially-explicit results (maps at 1ha resolution);

18/07/2013 35 © 2013, VITO NV

Optimised indicator value

Most prefered

solution for

specific criterium

Least prefered

solution for

specific criterium

Land value indicator Drinking water cone indicator

18/07/2013 36 © 2013, VITO NV

E.g. SAC BE2100040 - cones of depression

18/07/2013 37 © 2013, VITO NV

E.g. SAC BE2100040 – agricultural land value

18/07/2013 39 © 2013, VITO NV

Conclusions

» The OptimisationTool has been very instrumental for the implementation of the Habitats Directives in a participatory, scientifically robust and transparant way

» Stakeholders could directly evaluate the impact of the global optimal solution on their stakes and on the stakes of other stakeholders

18/07/2013 40 © 2013, VITO NV

Conclusions

» The OptimisationTool has been very instrumental for the implementation of the Habitats Directives in a participatory, scientifically robust and transparant way

» Stakeholders could directly evaluate the impact of the global optimal solution on their stakes and on the stakes of other stakeholders

» OptimisationTool is a generic tool that can be applied for other spatial optimisation problems:

» Optimal location of business parks within the province of Limburg (ongoing)

» ...