Spatial patterns of Land-System Archetypes & Archetypical Change Trajectories

We mapped 15 Land-System Archetypes (Figure V-2a), which can be grouped into four broad land-use categories: (i) agriculture, pertaining to croplands and grasslands, (ii) forestry, (iii) mosaic landscapes, and (iv) urban areas. Within each category, LSAs were ordered along gradients of intensity, e.g. archetypes of high- or low-intensive arable croplands represent regions that were characterised by either high or low fertiliser application rates. Most LSAs were dominated by one land use, i.e. archetypes were characterised by indicators that pertained to one land use and exhibited above-average values whereas the remaining indicators were below or close to the study area average (Table V-1a). Figure V-2b provides a brief description of all LSAs and their spatial coverage. A detailed description of each LSA regarding its characteristics and spatial patterns is provided in Text SI V-6, Figure SI V-7, and Table SI V-6.

Figure V-2: Spatial patterns of Land System Archetypes for the EU27 (a) and respective cluster descriptions and statistics (b). Numbers in front of each archetype refer to its cluster number (cf. panel b). The colour code in the first column refers to the colour scheme used in panel a. Please refer to the data sheets of single LSAs (Figure SI V-7) for a detailed archetype description and a colour-blind safe visualisation of their spatial patterns.

Table V-1: Indicator-specific magnitude of impact for each Land System Archetype (a) and Archetypical Change Trajectory (b). The larger the deviance from the study area average, the higher the impact of a given indictor in characterising the respective LSA/ACT. The + and – (LSAs) as well as ↑ and ↓ (ACTs) signs indicate whether an indicator is above or below the study area average; the absence of any sign indicates no substantial deviance from the study area average. We used different thresholds for LSAs (+ from ≥ 0.5 up to 1 s.d., ++ from ≥ 1 up to 2 s.d., and +++ ≥ 2 s.d.) and ACTs (↑ from ≥ 0.25 up to 0.5 s.d., ↑↑ from ≥0.5 up to 1 s.d., and ↑↑↑ ≥ 1 s.d.) due to a smaller data range for ACTs. The same thresholds were applied to negative deviances. Hence, no substantial deviances were defined for s.d. between -0.5 and 0.5 (LSAs) and -0.25 and 0.25 (ACTs). HANPP (Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production) indicators represent the following input data: yields from harvest for arable cropland (HANPP harv arable), permanent cropland (HANPP harv perm), and grassland (HANPP harv grass).

b) Archetypical Change Trajectory

Regarding the spatial coverage of LSAs, low-intensity archetypes dominated much of the EU, accounting for more than 55% of its terrestrial surface. High-intensity archetypes had a substantially smaller extent (26%) of which intensive agriculture was mainly located in central Europe, the UK, and Ireland, sometimes co-occurring with intensive forestry.

Medium- to low-intensity agriculture as well as low-intensity mosaic landscapes occurred predominantly in the eastern parts of Europe, highlighting a marked east-west divide in Europe’s land-use patterns. A mixture of intensively managed permanent crops, low-intensity grazing and mosaics characterised the Iberian Peninsula, locally complemented with medium-intensity croplands. Scandinavia was characterised by high-intensity forestry systems in the southern parts and low-intensity forestry in the remainder, complemented

with low-intensity grasslands in the northern, mountainous regions. Fallow farmland showed distinct spatial patterns, occurring mainly in mountainous regions (Pyrenees, Alps, and Carpathians) as well as in the Baltic countries and eastern Poland (c.f. Text SI V-4 for details).

We identified 17 Archetypical Change Trajectories (Figure V-3a), which can be grouped into four general types of trends: (i) Intensification and (ii) de-intensification within a certain land-use category, (iii) land-use conversions, and (iv) stability. As an example, the archetype intensification of wood production represented regions predominantly characterised by increases in wood harvesting. Most ACTs were dominated by changes in only a few (often one) land-change indicators (Table V-1b). Land-use conversions mostly represented de-intensification trends, except for urban expansion and forest loss for agricultural expansion. Figure V-3b provides a brief description of all ACTs and their spatial coverage. A detailed description of each ACT regarding its characteristics and spatial patterns is given in Text SI V-7, Figure SI V-8, and Table SI V-7.

Stability was the dominant ACT, covering more than 40% of the EU’s surface. De-intensification processes (e.g., cropland-grassland conversion or yield decreases on grasslands) were the spatially most widespread changes we found (approximately 30%

coverage). Intensification trajectories (e.g., increases in yields or fertiliser input) had a markedly lower extent (approximately 11%) and were not observed on grasslands. It is noteworthy that even regions that were classified into one of the change archetypes were often characterised by relative stability as only a few indicators (often only one or two) changed, while many others remained stable between 1990 and 2006. Stable land systems were particularly widespread in Central, Western, as well as Northern Europe. The central part of the EU had marked trends of intensifying wood production and increasing cropland yields but also cropland-grassland conversions and urban expansion. The eastern part of the EU was mainly characterised by de-intensification but smaller regions experienced cropland intensification. In the Mediterranean Region, large-scale de-intensification such as permanent cropland loss, cropland-grassland conversions, or forest expansion over grassland accompanied with substantial coastal urban expansion was typical (cf. Text SI V-5 for details).

Figure V-3: Spatial patterns of Archetypical Change Trajectories for the EU27 (a) and respective cluster descriptions and statistics (b). Numbers in front of each archetype refer to its cluster number (cf. panel b).

The colour code in the first column refers to the colour scheme used in panel a. Please refer to the data sheets of single ACTs (Figure SI V-8) for a detailed archetype description and a colour-blind safe visualisation of their spatial patterns. Note that we used the term “cropland” representatively for arable croplands in the ACT labels for the sake of brevity.