Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 7
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Influence of Spatial Disorder on Landscape Ecological Systems. Preparation of this report included the following steps: (1) Identification of the main directions of changes taking place in the landscape ecological systems (LES) of Poland in the last few decades; (2) Development of general models of LES response to these changes, with particular emphasis on the ecological effects of spatial disorder; (3) Indication of the main structural elements of the national LES, particularly those at the risk of chaotic or collisional land development; (4) Presentation of ecological and social consequences of changes taking place in LES as well as indication of possible directions of repair, together with an assessment of the scale of costs. Many changes occurring in the development of the country have a negative impact on the spatial order, resources and conditions of the functioning of ecological systems and the aesthetic values of the landscape. Generally these changes cause: (a) decrease in the natural potential of some supply ecosystem services; (b) decline in the natural potential of regulating ecosystem services; (c) decrease in the natural potential of habitat services; (d) decrease in the potential of some cultural services; (e) a decrease in the investment attractiveness of the landscape. Achieving high parameters of the living space should in particular be focused on the protection and harmonious shaping of: (I) a rich natural system, ensuring ecological balance and good rest conditions on the national and regional scale; (II) spatial order, ensuring efficient functioning of the economic system, protection of cultural heritage and high environmental quality standards; (III) high values of landscape physiognomy, including regional identity. The most urgent tasks necessary to improve spatial order in Poland, in particular the condition of landscape ecological systems and the advantages of landscape physiognomy, should be considered: (A) development and successive implementation of the National Landscape Policy, aimed at repairing and protecting landscape quality, including harmonious planning and effective management of its resources and assets; (B) introducing into the legal system provisions allowing for effective protection of spatial order as well as ecological and aesthetic values of the landscape; including the protection of particularly attractive open areas against changes in the character of its natural topography and natural land cover, as well as the repair and
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tadeusz J. Chmielewski
Szymon Chmielewski
Agnieszka Kułak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The development of linear infrastructure increases the degree of fragmentation of natural areas and has a negative impact on biodiversity and the range of available ecosystem services. The basic competing land use model is expanded to include infrastructure development. The extended model leads to the conclusion that due to the dual impact of the infrastructure (lowering the value of ecosystem services and increasing the private rents to developed land), the size of the natural area in the long-term equilibrium will be lower compared to the basic model. The preservation of nature ceases to be profitable enough. Infrastructure also reduces the marginal costs of conversion and thus increasing the volume of natural land being converted at avery moment along the transition path. If the decisions on optimal management of natural areas and infrastructure development are undertaken together, the result is a lower density of the infrastructure network and a larger ecosystem area in the steady state.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ivan Telega
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article discusses the valuation of ecosystem services in connection with the economic activity of the Russian Federation in the Arctic zone. It also considers the categories of ecosystem services in general and the assessment of ecosystem services in the Arctic in particular. The article also considers types of negative impacts on the Arctic ecosystems, their assessment, and investment risks existing in ecosystem services. It is shown that the application of the methodology and ecosystem services contributes to the adequate assessment and creation of a hierarchical classification of “usefulness” and “benefits” for society derived from the existence, use, and non-use of ecosystems. The concept of Arctic ecosystem services consists of three components: identification, monetisation, and ecological risk assessment. Identification, classification, and initial assessment, mainly at the qualitative level, allow us to determine and classify services for further improvement of life quality and regulation of socio-economic effects of environmental changes. Quantitative assessment is related to the identification of the degree of ecosystem service amenability. The example of the Arctic ecosystems shows that the possibility to assess and the accuracy of the assessment can be quite different and largely depends on the type of service. The analysis of possible ecosystem services and their relationship with the quality of life in the Russian Arctic indicates significant investment risks.
Go to article

Bibliography


ABAKUMOV E., MORGUN E., PECHKIN A., POLYAKOV V. 2020. Abandoned agricultural soils from the central part of the Yamal region of Russia: Morphology, diversity, and chemical properties. Open Agriculture. Vol. 5. No. 1 p. 94–106. DOI 10.1515/opag-2020-0010.
ALCAMO J., BENNETT E.M., HASSAN R. (eds.) 2003. Ecosystems and human well-being: A framework for assessment. Ser. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington D.C., USA. Island Press. ISBN 9781559634021 pp. 212.
BERKES F. 2002. Cross-scale institutional linkages: Perspectives from the bottom up. In: The drama of the commons. Eds. E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolak, P.C. Stern, S. Stonich, E.U. Weber. Washington, DC, USA. National Academy Press, p. 293–322.
BHATTARI U. 2017. Impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services: Direction for future research. Hydro Nepal Journal of Water Energy and Environment. Vol. 20 p. 41–48. DOI 10.3126/hn.v20i0.16488.
BOBYLEV S.N., ZAKHAROV V.M. 2009. Ekosistemnyye uslugi i ekonomika [Ecosystem services and the economy]. Moskva, Russia. OOO «Tipografiya LEVKO», Institut ustoychivogo razvitiya/Tsentr ekologicheskoy politiki Rossii pp. 72.
COSTANZA R. 1992. Toward an operational definition of ecosystem health. In: Ecosystem health. New Goals for Environmental Management. Eds. R. Costanza, B.G. Norton, B.D. Haskell. Washington D.C. Island Press. p. 239–256.
COSTANZA R., D’ARGE R., DE GROOT R., FARBER S., GRASSO M., HANNON B., ... VAN DEN BELT M. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. Vol. 387 p. 253–260. DOI 10.1038/387253a0.
DIETZ T. 2003. What is a good decision? Human Ecology Review. Vol. 10 p. 60–67.
DIETZ T., STERN P.C. 1998. Science, values and biodiversity. BioScience. Vol. 48 p. 441–444.
DYAKONOV K.N., DONCHEVA A.V. 2002. Ekologicheskoye proyektirova- niye i ekspertiza [Environmental design and expertise]. Moscow, Russia. Aspect-Press. ISBN 5-7567-0177-X pp. 384.
Federal Law of 24.07.2009 N 209-FZ. On hunting and on the conservation of hunting resources and on amending certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation pp. 57.
GOMES E., INÁCIO M., BOGDZEVIČ K., KALINAUSKAS M., KARNAUSKAITĖ D., PEREIRA P. 2021. Future land-use changes and its impacts on terrestrial ecosystem services: A review. Science of The Total Environment. Vol. 781, 146716. DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146716.
HAINES-YOUNG R., POTSCHIN M.B. 2017. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the application of the revised structure [online]. [Access 10.05.2021]. Available at: https://cices.eu/content/uploads/sites/8/ 2018/01/Guidance-V51-01012018.pdf
HEMMATI M. 2001. Multi-stakeholder processes: A methodological framework. Executive summary. Principles step-by-step guide [online]. London. UNED Forum pp. 28. [Access 13.04.2021]. Available at: https://www.pgexchange.org/msp/MSP%20Report% 20Exec%20Summary%20April%202001.pdf
JOUQUET P., TRAORÉ S., CHOOSAI C, HARTMANN C, BIGNELL D. 2011. Influence of termites on ecosystem functioning. Ecosystem services provided by termites. European Journal of Soil Biology. Vol. 4 p. 215–222. DOI 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2011.05.005.
KART AKTAS N., YILDIZ DONMEZ N. 2019. Effects of urbanisation and human activities on basin ecosystem: Sapanca Lake basin. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology. Vol. 20. No. 1 p. 102– 122.
KEESSTRA S., NUNES J., NOVARA A., FINGER D., AVELAR D., KALANTARI Z., CERDÀ A. 2018. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Science of The Total Environment. Vol. 610–611 p. 997–1009. DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.077.
LUKIN V.V., KLOKOV V.D., POMELOV V.N. (eds.) 2002. Sistema dogovora ob Antarctice. Pravovye kommentarii [System the Antarctic Treaty. The legal comments]. St. Petersburg. Hydrometeoizdat pp. 400.
MÄLER K.-G., GREN I., FOLKE C. 1994. Multiple use of environmental resources: A household production function approach to valuing natural capital. In Investing in natural capital. Eds. A. Jansson, M. Hammar, C. Folke, R. Costanza., Washington, DC. Island Press p. 234–249.
MARTIN S.L., BALANCE L.T., GROVES T. 2016. An ecosystem services perspective for the oceanic eastern tropical Pacific: Commercial fisheries, carbon storage, recreational fishing, and biodiversity. Frontiers in Marine Science. Vol. 50 No. 3. DOI 10.3389/fmars.2016.00050.
MELNIKOV V.P., GENNADINIK V.B., BROUSHKOV A.V. 2013. Aspects of cryosophy: cryodiversity in nature. Earth Cryosphere. Vol. 17. No. 2 p. 3–11.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005. Ecosystems and human well- being. Synthesis [online]. Washington D.C., USA. Island Press. ISBN 1-59726-040-1 pp. 160. [Access 10.05.2021]. Available at: http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf
NYKA M. 2017. The concept of ecosystem services in regulation of human activity at sea. Maritime Law. Vol. 33 p. 87–104.
PASCUAL U., MURADIAN R., BRANDER L., GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN E., MARTÍN- LÓPEZ B., VERMA M. ..., POLASKY S. 2010. The economics of valuing ecosystem services and biodiversity. In: The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic founda- tion. Ed. P. Kumar. London, UK. Routledge p. 183–256.
PEREIRA P., BOGUNOVIC I., ZHAO W., BARCELO D. 2021. Short-term effect of wildfires and prescribed fires on ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Science and Health. Vol. 22, 100266. DOI 10.1016/j.coesh.2021.100266.
PETER H.U., BRAUN C., MUSTAFA O., PFIFER S. 2008. Risk assessment for the Fildes Peninsula and Ardley Island, and development of management plans for their designation as specially protected or specially managed areas. Ser. Texte. Nr. 20. Jena, Germany. Federal Environment Agency. ISSN 1862-4804 pp. 508.
PETKOVA E., MAURER C., HENNINGER N., FRANCES I. 2002. Closing the gap: Information, participation, and justice in decision making for the environment. Washington DC, USA. World Resources Institute. ISBN 978-1569735251 pp. 153.
Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/ 2007. OJL 150, 14 June 2018.
ROLANDO J.L., TURIN C., RAMÍREZ D.A., MARES V., MONERRIS J., QUIROZ R. 2017. Key ecosystem services and ecological intensification of agriculture in the tropical high-Andean Puna as affected by land- use and climate changes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environ- ment. Vol. 236 p. 221–233. DOI 10.1016/j.agee.2016.12.010.
ROSENBERG A.G. 2014. Otsenki ekosistemnykh uslug dlya territorii Samarskoy oblasti [Assessment of ecosystem services for the territory of the Samara region]. Povolzhskiy ekologicheskiy zhurnal. Vol. 1 p. 139–145.
Roshydromet 2008. Assessment report on climate change and its consequences in Russian Federation. General summary. Moscow. Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring. ISBN 978-5-904-206-96-03 pp. 24.
Rospotrebnadzor 2010. Sanitarno-epidemiologicheskiye trebovaniya k organizatsiyam, osushchestvlyayushchim meditsinskuyu deya- tel’nost’ Sanitarno-epidemiologicheskiye pravila i normativy SanPiN 2.1.3.2630–10. The Decree from May, 18th, 2010 N 58 On approval SanPiN 2.1.3.2630-10 “Sanitary-epidemiological requirements for organizations engaged in medical activities” (with changes on 10 June 2016). Moskva. Federal’nyy tsentr gigiyeny i epidemiologii Rospotrebnadzora. ISBN 978-5-7508- 0925-7 pp. 255.
Rosvodresursy 2014. Skhema kompleksnogo ispol’zovaniya i okhrany vodnykh ob"yektov basseyna r. Pyasina [Scheme of complex use and protection of water objects of the basin of the Pyasina] [online]. Approved by the order of the EBVU dated June 20, No. 96. Moskva. Federalnoye agentsvo vodnykh resursov. [Access 03.02.2021]. Available at: http://skiovo.enbvu.ru/ SANTAREM F., SAAREN J., BRITO J.C. 2019.Mapping and analyzing cultural ecosystem services in conflict areas. Ecological Indicators. Vol. 110, 105943. DOI 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105943.
SEAA 2021. System of Environmental-Economic Accounting – Eco- system Accounting. [online]. United Nations pp. 371. [Access 29.09.2021]. Available at: https://seea.un.org/ecosystem-accounting
STERN P.C., FINEBERG H. (eds.) 1996. Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. Eds. P.C. Stern, H. Fineberg. Washington, DC. National Academy Press, ISBN 978- 0309089562 pp. 264.
STOLBOVOI V., MCCALLUM I. (eds.) 2002. Land resources of Russia [CD- ROM]. Laxenburg, Austria. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and the Russian Academy of Science.
SYLLA M., LASOTA T., SZEWRAŃSKI S. 2019. Valuing environmental amenities in peri-urban areas: Evidence from Poland. Sustain- ability. Vol. 11(3), 570. DOI 10.3390/su11030570.
TEEB 2008. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. An interim report. European Communities. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. ISBN-13 978-92-79-08960-2 pp. 64. TELEGA I. 2019. Ecosystem services in competing land use model with infrastructure effect. Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics. Vol. 11. No. 2 p. 73–92.
The Madrid Protocol 1991. Protocol on environmental protection to the Antarctic Treaty [online]. Madrid pp. 61. [Access 10.04.2021]. Available at: https://documents.ats.aq/recatt/Att006_e.pdf
TIKHONOVA T.V. 2017. Evaluation of the capacity of ecosystems in the subarctic territories of the Komi Republic. Proceedings of the Komi scientific center of UB RAS. Vol. 1. No. 17, 117.
Tromsø Declaration on the occasion of the Sixth Ministerial Meeting of the Arctic Council. The 29th of April, 2009, Tromsø, Norway [online]. [Access 10.04.20221]. Available at: http://library.arctic- portal.org/1253/
VERBITSKY J. 2018. Ecosystem services and Antarctica: The time has come? Ecosystem Services. Vol. 29. Part B p. 381–394. DOI 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.015.
WWF-Russia 2014. Protected areas in the Russian Arctic: Current state and prospects for development. Moscow. World Wide Fund for Nature pp. 239.
YANG S., ZHAO W., LIU Y., CHERUBINI F., FU B., PEREIRA P. 2020. Prioritizing sustainable development goals and linking them to ecosystem services: A global expert’s knowledge evaluation. Geography and Sustainability. Vol. 1. No. 4 p. 321–330. DOI 10.1016/j.geosus.2020.09.004.
ZUBRZYCKI S., KUTZBACH L., PFEIFFER E-M. 2014. Permafrost-affected soils and their carbon pools with a focus on the Russian Arctic. Solid Earth. Vol. 5 p. 595–609. DOI 10.5194/se-5-595-2014.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Evgeny Abakumov
1
ORCID: ORCID
Azamat Suleymanov
1 2
ORCID: ORCID
Yuriy Guzov
1
ORCID: ORCID
Victor Titov
1
ORCID: ORCID
Angelina Vashuk
1
ORCID: ORCID
Elena Shestakova
1
ORCID: ORCID
Irina Fedorova
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Saint Petersburg State University, 16 line 29 Vasilyevskiy Island, 199178, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
  2. Ufa State Petroleum Technological University, Ufa, Russia
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The book focuses on the issue of nature protection in urban areas. The subject matter of the research was the formal and legal conditions of protected areas in cities. The analysis regarded Polish and global solutions in the scope of the nature protection categories in urban areas, objectives of creating urban protected areas and instruments for fulfi lling the aims of protection in the spatial aspect. The research on globally applied solutions in the scope of nature protection was based on the analysis of source literature and legal acts on nature conservation in cities situated in various countries. As a result, four major types of urban protected areas were distinguished in 80 different cities. The research enabled formulating major characteristics of urban protected areas. Those were, in particular: the integrated approach to the protection of natural and cultural resources and equal treatment of the natural and social objectives of protection. This was the basis for a critical analysis of domestic solutions in the subject matter. The research on formal and legal conditions for the functioning of protected areas in Polish cities was conducted in the administrative borders of voivodeship capitals. The research included 18 cities in total. The analysis concerned basic documents related to the widely understood management of protected areas, including, in particular: legal acts establishing individual protected areas and protected areas management plans, as well as the studies of conditions and directions for the spatial development of communes and local spatial development plans. The research work regarded spatial forms of nature protection, including: national parks, natural reserves, regional parks, protected landscape areas, Natura 2000 areas, ecological sites, documentation sites and nature-landscape complexes. The research included 229 protected areas in total. For the abovementioned protected areas, the following aspects were analyzed: subject matter and objectives of their protection, premises for creating their functional and spatial infrastructure and methods for their development, as well as the scope of provisions in urban spatial planning documents in the abovementioned respect. The research enabled identifying the key problems in the functioning of protected areas in Polish cities, including:

• small stability of regulations on nature protection and consequential lack of continuity in the protection of naturally valuable areas,

• noticeable tendency to loosen the regulations in the subjected scope, which leads to marginalizing the issues of nature protection while planning urban development.

• no coordination of actions performed by various stakeholders in regard to the protected areas,

• failure to adjust nature protection objectives to conditions resulting from the location in urban areas,

• lack of efficient tools to fulfi ll the nature protection objectives in the spatial aspect.

Based on the identifi ed models of environmental protection in urban areas, premises were formulated with regard to the new model for environmental protection in Polish cities. Three scenarios were proposed with regard to potential changes: modification-oriented, reorganization-oriented and radical. The modification-oriented scenario includes:

• adding the social aspect to the objectives of nature protection in cities,

• extending the scope of the nature conservation act of new nature protection categories appropriate for urban areas,

• increasing the importance of the study of conditions and directions for the spatial development and protection plans with regard to the planning permission.

Reorganization-oriented scenario provides for:

• verifying the objectives of nature protection,

• introducing the obligation to prepare management plans for all protected areas in cities,

• introducing the obligation to update and prepare development plans for areas were nature conservation areas were established.

The radical scenario includes:

• introducing new categories of nature protection in urban areas, including categories that ensure preserving and shaping the connectivity of protected area,

• exposing ecosystem services as the major motif of nature protection in cities,

• introducing new instruments for managing protected areas in cities.

Applying one of the abovementioned scenarios may signifi cantly improve the efficiency of natural protection in cities. It may also contribute to introducing a more innovative model for urban nature protection. Each scenarios will entail the implementation of quite significant legislative changes, either in the scope of nature protection and spatial planning.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Renata Giedych
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The concept of ecosystem services becomes more and more popular in regulation of the environmental protection. One of the premises of that concept is treatment of a human and human activity as an integral part of an ecosystem. Interrelations between human activity and ecosystem can be described through the concept of ecosystem services. A certain degree of commodification of natural environment which is immanently connected with the concept of ecosystem services can become useful as a tool of assessing the impact of human activities on ecosystem as well as regulating that impact. Marine protection law is a good example of attempts to introduce the interrelated concepts of ecosystem approach and ecosystem services into functioning of the regulatory schemes.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maciej Nyka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aboveground net primary productivity ( ANPP) of bofedales is one of the most important indicators for the provision of ecosystem services in the high Andean areas. In the case of bofedales, the evaluation of the ANPP supply capacity as a service on a spatial and temporal scale through remote sensing has been little addressed. The capacity, intra and interannual, to provide the ANPP of the high Andean wetlands was quantified at a spatial and temporal level through remote sensing. The normalized difference vegetation index ( NDVI) of the MODIS sensor was used according to the Monteith model (1972), product of the incident photosynthetically active radiation, fraction of the absorbed radiation, and the efficiency of using the radiation of the calibrated vegetation with dry matter sampling in the field. Results show an ANPP prediction R 2 of 0.52 (p < 0.05), with no significant spatial difference between field samples. When applying the model, the intra-annual temporary ANPP supply capacity presents a maximum average of 160.54 kg DM·ha –1·month –1 in the rainy season (December–May) and a maximum average of 81.17 kg DM·ha –1·month –1 in the dry season (June–October). In 2003–2020, the interannual temporary capacity presented values of 1100–1700 kg DM·ha –1·year –1. This makes it possible not to affect the sustainability of the wetlands and prevent their depletion and degradation. Understanding the ANPP supply capacity of bofedales can favour the efficient use of the resource and indirectly benefit its conservation.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Deyvis Cano
1
ORCID: ORCID
Astrid Crispin
2
María Custodio
3
ORCID: ORCID
Fernán Chanamé
2
ORCID: ORCID
Richard Peñaloza
4
ORCID: ORCID
Samuel Pizarro
2 5
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Programa Académico de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Huánuco, Jr. Hermilio Valdizán N° 871, Huánuco, Peru
  2. Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Facultad de Zootecnia, Huancayo, Peru
  3. Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Centro de Investigación de Medicina en Altura y Medio Ambiente, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Huancayo, Peru
  4. Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Centro de Investigación Huancayo, Peru
  5. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Laboratorio de Ecología y Utilización de Pastizales, Lima, Peru
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Exploring the drivers of changes in ecosystem services is crucial to maintain ecosystem functionality, especially in the diverse Central Citarum watershed. This study utilises the integrated valuation of ecosystem service and trade-offs (InVEST) model and multiscale geographically weighted regression (MGWR) model to examine ecosystem services patterns from 2006 to 2018. The InVEST is a hydrological model to calculate water availability and evaluate benefits provided by nature through simulating alterations in the amount of water yields driven by land use/cover changes. Economic, topographic, climate, and vegetation factors are considered, with an emphasis on their essential components. The presence of a geographical link between dependent and explanatory variables was investigated using a multiscale geographic weighted regression model. The MGWR model is employed to analyse spatial impacts. The integration of both models simplified the process and enhanced its understanding. The findings reveal the following patterns: 1) decreasing land cover and increasing ecosystem services demand in the watershed, along with a decline in water yield, e.g. certain sub-districts encounter water scarcity, while others have abundant water resources; 2) the impact of natural factors on water yield shifts along vegetation > climate > topography (2006) changes to climate > vegetation > topography (2018).
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jaka Suryanta
1
ORCID: ORCID
Irmadi Nahib
1
ORCID: ORCID
Fadhlullah Ramadhani
2
ORCID: ORCID
Farid Rifaie
2
ORCID: ORCID
Nawa Suwedi
1
ORCID: ORCID
Vicca Karolinoerita
2
ORCID: ORCID
Destika Cahyana
3
ORCID: ORCID
Fahmi Amhar
2
ORCID: ORCID
Suprajaka Suprajaka
4
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Research Center for Limnology and Water Resources, National Research and Innovation Agency of Indonesia (BRIN), Jalan Raya Jakarta Bogor Km. 47 Cibinong, Bogor, West Java 16911, Indonesia
  2. Research Center for Geoinformatics, National Research and Innovation Agency of Indonesia (BRIN), Jalan Raya Jakarta-Bogor Km. 46, Cibinong, Bogor, West Java 16911, Indonesia
  3. Research Center for Food Crops, National Research and Innovation Agency of Indonesia (BRIN), Jalan Raya Jakarta Bogor Km. 47, Cibinong, Bogor, West Java 16911, Indonesia
  4. Center for Research, Promotion and Cooperation, Geospatial Information Agency, Jalan Raya Jakarta-Bogor Km. 46, Cibinong, Bogor, West Java 16911, Indonesia

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more