Mapping where biodiversity goals meet local values in European land use futures

In Europe, spatial planning is being asked to reconcile biodiversity restoration, climate mitigation and social needs at the same time. In practice, however, European scale planning often fails to align with locally defined values and priorities that emerge in participatory processes. In this contribution, we compare a SSP-scenario with a scenario from local visions for future landscapes to explore where spatial planning can create biodiversity positive and socially just transformations. For twelve case studies in Europe, stakeholders co-developed “Possible Landscapes” that articulate place-based visions for vital, biodiverse and liveable landscapes.

These two contrasting 2050 land-system scenarios (SSP vs. local visions) are simulated with the CLUMondo model to model land-system futures for Europe. From the resulting land-system maps, spatial indicators are derived for a diverse range of outcomes: high level restoration (nature area, patch size and connectivity including mosaics), agriculture and climate mitigation (changes in emission relevant land uses such as peat soils and forest loss, and food production), local wellbeing (access to green space near cities) and environmental safety (shifts toward green land uses in drought, flood and erosion prone areas).

The indicators are then compared with the local needs and values, with data from Eurobarometer surveys that reflect how people value biodiversity, climate action and landscape based wellbeing. For each indicator, we compare how strongly current landscapes and future scenarios deliver on these needs and map where priorities are structurally under served or improved across scenarios.

The results will provide a typology of European regions in terms of agreement and conflict between biodiversity goals, climate-related land uses and local values. By creating quantitative scenarios from co-produced local visions, we reflect on changing roles of science and society in spatial planning and highlight implications for justice, democracy and participation. We will discuss how this knowledge can support more democratic and biodiversity sensitive spatial planning.