4.7 Article

How much of the world's land has been urbanized, really? A hierarchical framework for avoiding confusion

Journal

LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY
Volume 29, Issue 5, Pages 763-771

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-014-0034-y

Keywords

Urbanization; Global urban land; Urban area; Built-up area; Impervious surface; Hierarchy of definitions

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2010CB950901, 2014CB954302, 2014CB954303]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41222003, 41321001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urbanization has transformed the world's landscapes, resulting in a series of ecological and environmental problems. To assess urbanization impacts and improve sustainability, one of the first questions that we must address is: how much of the world's land has been urbanized? Unfortunately, the estimates of the global urban land reported in the literature vary widely from less than 1-3 % primarily because different definitions of urban land were used. To evade confusion, here we propose a hierarchical framework for representing and communicating the spatial extent of the world's urbanized land at the global, regional, and more local levels. The hierarchical framework consists of three spatially nested definitions: urban area that is delineated by administrative boundaries, built-up area that is dominated by artificial surfaces, and impervious surface area that is devoid of life. These are really three different measures of urbanization. In 2010, the global urban land was close to 3 %, the global built-up area was about 0.65 %, and the global impervious surface area was merely 0.45 %, of the word's total land area (excluding Antarctica and Greenland). We argue that this hierarchy of urban land measures, in particular the ratios between them, can also facilitate better understanding the biophysical and socioeconomic processes and impacts of urbanization.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available