IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v271y2014icp83-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of the landscape development intensity (LDI) index in wetland mitigation banking

Author

Listed:
  • Reiss, Kelly Chinners
  • Hernandez, Erica
  • Brown, Mark T.

Abstract

The landscape development intensity (LDI) index, which can be used as a human disturbance gradient, is an effective tool in assessing location of wetland mitigation banks where large tracts of land are managed to protect wetland function by offsetting wetland losses from off-site land development. As part of a larger study to determine the effectiveness of mitigation banking in Florida, this article focuses on characterizing the landscape intensity of wetland mitigation banks in the state. Two scales of the LDI index were calculated: wetland assessment area scale LDI index (n=58), which characterizes the landscape surrounding a small parcel of land within a mitigation bank boundary, and mitigation bank scale LDI index (n=26), which characterizes the lands surrounding the entire boundary of the wetland mitigation bank. Approximately two-thirds of the wetland assessment areas (n=38) had LDI index scores less than 2.0 (where 0.0 represents no human development), with a mean LDI index score of 3.2 (σ=4.9). LDI index scores were calculated such that all lands within the 100m zone surrounding a wetland assessment area designated as restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation were assigned LDI index scores reflecting natural lands. In this application, the LDI index score was considered a tool to predict potential wetland condition based on successful restoration. Bank scale LDI index scores, based on land use within the 100m zone surrounding the entire mitigation bank, were generally higher than assessment area scores, with a mean bank scale LDI index score of 7.8 (σ=5.4) and a median of 6.5. At the wetland scale, evaluation of landscape condition using the LDI index presented a quantitative analysis tool to determine potential ecological lift (i.e. expected gain in ecological condition) with successful wetland restoration practices within the mitigation bank. Whereas at the bank scale, LDI index calculations suggested the expected impacts from human land use activities outside of the control of the bank property. We propose using the LDI index to facilitate calculation of wetland mitigation potential and credit awards for mitigation banks, and that regardless of the tool used consideration of potential wetland functional lift should incorporate a landscape perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Reiss, Kelly Chinners & Hernandez, Erica & Brown, Mark T., 2014. "Application of the landscape development intensity (LDI) index in wetland mitigation banking," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 271(C), pages 83-89.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:271:y:2014:i:c:p:83-89
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.04.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380013002329
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.04.017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Moreno Mateos & Mary E Power & Francisco A Comín & Roxana Yockteng, 2012. "Structural and Functional Loss in Restored Wetland Ecosystems," Working Papers id:4755, eSocialSciences.
    2. David Moreno-Mateos & Mary E Power & Francisco A Comín & Roxana Yockteng, 2012. "Structural and Functional Loss in Restored Wetland Ecosystems," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Levrel, Harold & Pioch, Sylvain, 2017. "Wetland mitigation banking: Negotiations with stakeholders in a zone of ecological-economic viability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 512-518.
    2. Yuncai Wang & Jiake Shen & Wentao Yan & Chundi Chen, 2019. "Effects of Landscape Development Intensity on River Water Quality in Urbanized Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Edward B. Barbier, 2016. "The Protective Value of Estuarine and Coastal Ecosystem Services in a Wealth Accounting Framework," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 37-58, May.
    2. Scemama, Pierre & Levrel, Harold, 2019. "Influence of the Organization of Actors in the Ecological Outcomes of Investment in Restoration of Biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 71-79.
    3. Juan Carlos Carrasco Baquero & Verónica Lucía Caballero Serrano & Fernando Romero Cañizares & Daisy Carolina Carrasco López & David Alejandro León Gualán & Rufino Vieira Lanero & Fernando Cobo-Gradín, 2023. "Water Quality Determination Using Soil and Vegetation Communities in the Wetlands of the Andes of Ecuador," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Paula Meli & Karen D Holl & José María Rey Benayas & Holly P Jones & Peter C Jones & Daniel Montoya & David Moreno Mateos, 2017. "A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Swades Pal & Satyajit Paul, 2021. "Stability consistency and trend mapping of seasonally inundated wetlands in Moribund deltaic part of India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 12925-12953, September.
    6. Alex C Valach & Kuno Kasak & Kyle S Hemes & Tyler L Anthony & Iryna Dronova & Sophie Taddeo & Whendee L Silver & Daphne Szutu & Joseph Verfaillie & Dennis D Baldocchi, 2021. "Productive wetlands restored for carbon sequestration quickly become net CO2 sinks with site-level factors driving uptake variability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-22, March.
    7. Jacob, Céline & Vaissiere, Anne-Charlotte & Bas, Adeline & Calvet, Coralie, 2016. "Investigating the inclusion of ecosystem services in biodiversity offsetting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 92-102.
    8. Van Dover, C.L. & Aronson, J. & Pendleton, L. & Smith, S. & Arnaud-Haond, S. & Moreno-Mateos, D. & Barbier, E. & Billett, D. & Bowers, K. & Danovaro, R. & Edwards, A. & Kellert, S. & Morato, T. & Poll, 2014. "Ecological restoration in the deep sea: Desiderata," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 98-106.
    9. Jenneke M. Visser & Scott M. Duke-Sylvester, 2017. "LaVegMod v2: Modeling Coastal Vegetation Dynamics in Response to Proposed Coastal Restoration and Protection Projects in Louisiana, USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Piepho, Hans-Peter & Bahrs, Enno, 2021. "Farmers’ preferences for nature conservation compensation measures with a focus on eco-accounts according to the German Nature Conservation Act," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Moisés Méndez-Toribio & Cristina Martínez-Garza & Eliane Ceccon, 2021. "Challenges during the execution, results, and monitoring phases of ecological restoration: Learning from a country-wide assessment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-21, April.
    12. Paul A. Sandifer & Ariana E. Sutton‐Grier, 2014. "Connecting stressors, ocean ecosystem services, and human health," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(3), pages 157-167, August.
    13. Charlotte Bigard & Sylvain Pioch & John D Thompson, 2017. "The inclusion of biodiversity in impact assessment for urban development: policy-related progress limited by gaps and semantic confusion," Post-Print hal-02448719, HAL.
    14. Jie Pang & Leshan Jin & Yujie Yang & Heng Li & Zongling Chu & Fei Ding, 2022. "Policy Cognition, Household Income and Farmers’ Satisfaction: Evidence from a Wetland Ecological Compensation Project in the Poyang Lake Area at the Micro Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-14, September.
    15. Peter J Carrick & Katherine J Forsythe, 2020. "The species composition—ecosystem function relationship: A global meta-analysis using data from intact and recovering ecosystems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, July.
    16. Blignaut, James & Aronson, James, 2020. "Developing a restoration narrative: A pathway towards system-wide healing and a restorative culture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Jin Huang & Hao Yang & Wei He & Yu Li, 2022. "Ecological Service Value Tradeoffs: An Ecological Water Replenishment Model for the Jilin Momoge National Nature Reserve, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-14, March.
    18. Yaxian Zhang & Jiangwen Fan & Suizi Wang, 2020. "Assessment of Ecological Carrying Capacity and Ecological Security in China’s Typical Eco-Engineering Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, May.
    19. Aryal, Kishor & Ojha, Bhuwan Raj & Maraseni, Tek, 2021. "Perceived importance and economic valuation of ecosystem services in Ghodaghodi wetland of Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    20. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:271:y:2014:i:c:p:83-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.