4.5 Article

Simulation of future forest and land use/cover changes (2019-2039) using the cellular automata-Markov model

Journal

GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL
Volume 37, Issue 4, Pages 1183-1202

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2020.1778102

Keywords

Forest structure; LULC; CA-Markov; remote sensing; GIS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study used the cellular automata-Markov model to simulate and assess the changes in forest cover and land use/land cover (LULC) between 2019 and 2039. The model's performance was evaluated and found to be reliable. The results showed an increase in total forest area, settlement, and water between 1999 and 2019, while the agriculture area decreased. The simulation results for 2019-2039 predicted a decrease in total forest area, residential and water surface areas, and agriculture area. Tracking these changes will be beneficial for decision making and strategy development by forest planners and managers.
This study aimed to simulate and assess forest cover and land use/land cover (LULC) changes between 2019 and 2039 using the cellular automata-Markov model. The performance of the model was evaluated by comparing the 2019 simulation map with the 2019 supervised classified map, and it was found to be reliable, with a similarity rate of 85.43%. The LULC analysis and estimates were carried out for a total of six classes: coniferous, broad-leaf, mixed forest, settlement, water and agriculture. Between 1999 and 2019, the areas of total forest increased by 17.4%, settlement by 84.6% and water by 20.1%, whereas the agriculture area decreased by 33.2%. According to 2019-2039 land use/cover simulation results, there were decreases of 2.4% in total forest area and 3.7% in residential and water surface areas, but a 6.9% decrease in the agriculture class. Tracking these changes will contribute to decision making and strategy development efforts of forest planners and managers.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available