| Literature DB >> 31948082 |
Gulkaiyr Omurakunova1,2,3,4, Anming Bao1,2,3, Wenqiang Xu1,2,3, Eldiiar Duulatov5, Liangliang Jiang1,2,3,6, Peng Cai1,3,6, Farkhod Abdullaev3,7,8, Vincent Nzabarinda1,2,3, Khaydar Durdiev1,2,3,8, Makhabat Baiseitova4.
Abstract
The expansion of urban areas due to population increase and economic expansion creates demand and depletes natural resources, thereby causing land use changes in the main cities. This study focuses on land cover datasets to characterize impervious surface (urban area) expansion in select cities from 1993 to 2017, using supervised classification maximum likelihood techniques and by quantifying impervious surfaces. The results indicate an increasing trend in the impervious surface area by 35% in Bishkek, 75% in Osh, and 15% in Jalal-Abad. The overall accuracy (OA) for the image classification of two different datasets for the three cities was between 82% and 93%, and the kappa coefficients (KCs) were approximately 77% and 91%. The Landsat images with other supplementary data showed positive urban growth in all of the cities. The GDP, industrial growth, and urban population growth were driving factors of impervious surface sprawl in these cities from 1993 to 2017.Landscape Expansion Index (LEI) results also provided good evidence for the change of impervious surfaces during the study period. The results emphasize the idea of applying future planning and sustainable urban development procedures for sustainable use of natural resources and their management, which will increase life quality in urban areas and environments.Entities:
Keywords: driving factors; impervious surfaces; landscape expansion index; supervised classification; urban
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31948082 PMCID: PMC6981506 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17010362
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of the study area.
List of Landsat data with their numbers of bands. Note: TM = Thematic Mapper; ETM + = Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus; OLI = Operational Land Imager; USGS = United States Geological Survey.
| Satellite | Sensor | Imagery Date | Spatial Resolution (Meters) | Path/Row | Cloud Cover (Percent) | Band | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landsat 5 | TM | 6/10/1993 | 30 | 151/30 | 6 | 7 | USGS |
| 6/10/1993 | 151/32 | 1 | |||||
| Landsat 7 | ETM+ | 8/24/2000 | 30 | 151/30 | 6 | 6, 7 | |
| 151/32 | 0 | ||||||
| Landsat 5 | TM | 8/12/2010 | 30 | 151/30 | 4 | 7 | |
| 8/28/2010 | 151/32 | 1 | |||||
| Landsat 8 | OLI | 8/12/2017 | 30 | 151/30 | 2.4 | 8 | |
| 7/11/2017 | 151/32 | 2.93 |
Figure 2Flowchart of urban expansion method.
Overall accuracy (OA) and kappa coefficients (KCs) for the classifications of Landsat TM, ETM, and 8 OLI data from 1993 to 2017, and for Sentinel-2 for 2017.
| Class | Landsat Cities | 1993 | 2000 | 2010 | 2017 | Sentinel-2 (2017) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PA | UA | PA | UA | PA | UA | PA | UA | PA | UA | ||
| IS | Bishkek | 93.3 | 93.3 | 93.3 | 96.6 | 93.3 | 90.3 | 93.3 | 87.5 | 100 | 93.8 |
| Osh | 73.3 | 88 | 100 | 78.9 | 100 | 88.2 | 96.7 | 85.5 | 100 | 68.2 | |
| Jalal-Abad | 93.3 | 96.6 | 76.7 | 79.3 | 90 | 93.1 | 93.3 | 93.3 | 96.7 | 78.4 | |
| NV | Bishkek | 96.7 | 85.3 | 96.7 | 59.2 | 93.3 | 77.8 | 93.3 | 65.1 | 90 | 90 |
| Osh | 96.7 | 64.4 | 90 | 75 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 65.1 | 93.3 | 100 | |
| Jalal-Abad | 96.7 | 80.6 | 90 | 61.4 | 96.7 | 53.7 | 100 | 83.3 | 100 | 93.8 | |
| BL | Bishkek | 90 | 100 | 40 | 100 | 83.3 | 100 | 60 | 100 | 90 | 93.1 |
| Osh | 93.3 | 96.6 | 90 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 50 | 100 | 93.3 | 100 | |
| Jalal-Abad | 86.7 | 96.3 | 66.7 | 95.2 | 20 | 100 | 80 | 100 | 73.3 | 100 | |
| WB | Bishkek | 96.7 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 93.3 | 100 | 90 | 100 | 96.7 | 100 |
| Osh | 70 | 100 | 63.3 | 100 | 86.7 | 100 | 83.3 | 100 | 66.7 | 100 | |
| Jalal-Abad | 90 | 96.4 | 86.7 | 100 | 100 | 96.8 | 100 | 100 | 96.7 | 100 | |
| Overall | Bishkek | 94.2 | 82.5 | 90.8 | 84.2 | 94 | |||||
| Osh | 83.3 | 85.8 | 96.7 | 82.5 | 88 | ||||||
| Jalal-Abad | 91.7 | 80 | 76.7 | 93.3 | 92 | ||||||
| Kappa | Bishkek | 92 | 77 | 87.8 | 78.9 | 92 | |||||
| Osh | 78 | 81 | 96 | 77 | 84 | ||||||
| Jalal-Abad | 89 | 73 | 69 | 91 | 89 | ||||||
Figure 3Types of urban growth: (a) infilling growth; (b) edge expansion; (c) outlying growth.
Figure 4Impervious surface areas for different years.
Figure 5The bar charts showing the changes in the area covered during the study period. Note: IS—impervious surface; NV—natural vegetation; BL—bare land; WB—water body.
Figure 6Map of impervious and nonimpervious surfaces for the three main cities.
Figure 7Changes in impervious and nonimpervious surfaces during 1993–2017.
Figure 8Spatial distribution of urban growth in the three main cities of Kyrgyzstan for the study period for (a–c) Bishkek, (d–f) Osh, and (g–i) Jalal-Abad for three different periods.
Figure 9Percentages of area for the urban growth types in the three cities: (a) Bishkek, (b) Osh and (c) Jalal-Abad.
Figure 10Correlation between impervious surface changes and population, gross domestic product (GDP), and industrial changes for the period 1993–2017.