Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 2.81 — strongly supporting 6 facts
Urban growth is identified as a primary driver of land-use change that negatively impacts biodiversity [1], with practitioners consistently ranking it as a greater threat to biodiversity than renewable energy developments {fact:1, fact:2, fact:3, fact:6}. Furthermore, research has specifically focused on developing strategies to mitigate the negative effects of urban growth on biodiversity [2].
Facts (6)
Sources
Practitioners' perceived risks to biodiversity from renewable energy ... nature.com 6 facts
procedurePractitioners compared the direct net impacts on biodiversity from the land footprint of large-scale wind and solar energy (LSWS) with impacts from other industrial-scale land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) drivers, including agriculture, farming, urban growth, timber harvest, and fossil fuel extraction and operations.
referenceSushinsky et al. (2013) investigated strategies for urban growth that minimize negative impacts on biodiversity.
measurementAgreement among practitioners that biodiversity impacts from urban growth will surpass those from wind development ranged from 85% among NGO practitioners to full consensus among state environmental agency practitioners.
measurementThe majority of respondents from NGOs, research institutes, and state environmental agencies viewed projected urban development as a greater threat to biodiversity than solar energy (range 62–93%).
measurementPractitioners in all regions except the Pacific Coast foresee future urban growth having a greater impact on biodiversity than wind energy, with 86–94% of respondents holding this view.
referenceScholars have identified six predominant drivers of land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) that impact biodiversity: agriculture, pasturelands, urban growth, forestry, fossil fuel extraction, and fossil fuel operations.