Literature DB >> 26687091

Integration of land use and land cover inventories for landscape management and planning in Italy.

Lorenzo Sallustio1, Michele Munafò2,3, Nicola Riitano4, Bruno Lasserre5, Lorenzo Fattorini6, Marco Marchetti7.   

Abstract

There are both semantic and technical differences between land use (LU) and land cover (LC) measurements. In cartographic approaches, these differences are often neglected, giving rise to a hybrid classification. The aim of this paper is to provide a better understanding and characterization of the two classification schemes using a comparison that allows maximization of the informative power of both. The analysis was carried out in the Molise region (Central Italy) using sample information from the Italian Land Use Inventory (IUTI). The sampling points were classified with a visual interpretation of aerial photographs for both LU and LC in order to estimate surfaces and assess the changes that occurred between 2000 and 2012. The results underscore the polarization of land use and land cover changes resulting from the following: (a) recolonization of natural surfaces, (b) strong dynamisms between the LC classes in the natural and semi-natural domain and (c) urban sprawl on the lower hills and plains. Most of the observed transitions are attributable to decreases in croplands, natural grasslands and pastures, owing to agricultural abandonment. The results demonstrate that a comparison between LU and LC estimates and their changes provides an understanding of the causes of misalignment between the two criteria. Such information may be useful for planning policies in both natural and semi-natural contexts as well as in urban areas.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Double classification; Estimation; Monitoring; Point sampling; Stratified allocation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26687091     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-015-5056-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  2 in total

Review 1.  Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100.

Authors:  O E Sala; F S Chapin; J J Armesto; E Berlow; J Bloomfield; R Dirzo; E Huber-Sanwald; L F Huenneke; R B Jackson; A Kinzig; R Leemans; D M Lodge; H A Mooney; M Oesterheld; N L Poff; M T Sykes; B H Walker; M Walker; D H Wall
Journal:  Science       Date:  2000-03-10       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Reconnecting to the biosphere.

Authors:  Carl Folke; Asa Jansson; Johan Rockström; Per Olsson; Stephen R Carpenter; F Stuart Chapin; Anne-Sophie Crépin; Gretchen Daily; Kjell Danell; Jonas Ebbesson; Thomas Elmqvist; Victor Galaz; Fredrik Moberg; Måns Nilsson; Henrik Osterblom; Elinor Ostrom; Asa Persson; Garry Peterson; Stephen Polasky; Will Steffen; Brian Walker; Frances Westley
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 5.129

  2 in total
  2 in total

1.  A socio-environmental monitoring system for a UNESCO biosphere reserve.

Authors:  Kim Lowell
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Geospatial measurement of urban sprawl using multi-temporal datasets from 1991 to 2021: case studies of four Indian medium-sized cities.

Authors:  Vishal Chettry
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 3.307

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.