Abstract

Environmental monitoring and assessment frequently require remote sensing techniques to be deployed. The production of higher level spatial data sets from remote sensing has often been driven by short-term funding constraints and specific information requirements by the funding agencies. As a result, a wide variety of historic data sets exist that were generated using different atmospheric correction methods, classification algorithms, class labelling systems, training sites, map projections, input data and spatial resolutions. Because technology, science and policy objectives are continuously changing, repeated natural resource inventories rarely employ the same methods as in previous surveys and often use class definitions that are inconsistent with earlier data sets (Comber, Fisher and Wadsworth 2003). Since it is generally not economically feasible to recreate these historic land cover/land use data sets, often inconsistent data sets have to be compared. An environmental assessment of land cover and land use change in Central Siberia is presented. It utilises several different digital land cover maps generated from satellite data acquired in different years. The specific characteristics of different land cover maps create difficulties in interpreting change maps as either land cover/land use change or a pure data inconsistency. Many studies do not explicitly deal with these inconsistencies. It is argued that a rigorous treatment of multi-temporal data sets must include an explicit map of consistency between the multi-temporal land cover maps. A method utilising aspects of quantified conceptual overlaps (Ahlqvist 2004) and semantic-statistical approaches (Comber, Fisher and Wadsworth 2004a,b) is presented. The method is applied to reconcile three independent land cover maps of Siberia, which differ in the number and types of classes, spatial resolution, acquisition date, sensor used and purpose. A map of inconsistency scores is presented that identifies areas of most likely land cover change based on the maximum inconsistency between the maps. The method of quantified conceptual overlaps was used to identify regions where further investigations on the causes of the observed inconsistencies seem warranted. The method highlights the value of assessing change between inconsistent spatial data sets, provided that the inconsistency is adequately considered.

Highlights

  • There is a common problem in the environmental sciences that frequently when a new survey is conducted it creates a new “baseline” rather than faithfully repeating an established procedure

  • For phenomena like land cover and land use, we are less certain whether an observed difference is “real” or whether it is a different representation of the same entity

  • Everyone is familiar with land cover and land use, and there is an inbuilt assumption that the common terms or labels, such as forest, wetland, grassland etc., relate to a common physical reality

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There is a common problem in the environmental sciences that frequently when a new survey is conducted it creates a new “baseline” rather than faithfully repeating an established procedure. For phenomena like land cover and land use, we are less certain whether an observed difference is “real” (the land cover or land use has changed) or whether it is a different representation of the same entity In the past this problem was less acute because a given map was used to support a description of the phenomena, libraries are full of hundreds of pages of monographs describing the issues, the methods and the implications behind a particular survey. The objective of this paper is to introduce the approach and demonstrate the application of “quantified conceptual overlaps” to a real study of land cover change in Siberia using inconsistent land cover data that were generated by different producers and use different class definitions. The general and widespread issue of reconciling inconsistent data sets is discussed

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.