| Literature DB >> 35805353 |
Sakib Hasan1, Woonsup Choi1, Sangjun Kang2.
Abstract
The study aimed to examine how changing land use conditions are related to the occurrence of heat waves. The employed methods were (1) the Urban Expansion Intensity Index (UEII) and the Green Expansion Intensity (GEII) for 49 cities in the U.S. between 1992 and 2019; (2) Spearman correlation analyses of heat wave indicators including frequency, season, duration, and intensity for UEII, and GEII, respectively. Major findings include the following: (1) urban areas have increased rapidly with an average UEII value of 1.5; (2) green Areas have increased at a slow pace, which have a GEII average value of 0.017, where the median value is -0.1, meaning the green area is declining in most U.S. cities; (3) The UEII and heat wave duration show a negative relationship with a significant correlation (γs = -0.296 and ρ = 0.04); (4) UEII and heat wave intensity show a positive relationship with a significant correlation (γs = 0.32 and ρ = 0.027). It was found that heat wave intensity can be a public health issue in high urban expansion intensity areas. The results imply that cities would be better in a more compact pattern with more expanded green areas to mitigate the negative health impacts of heat waves on citizens in urban areas. It is noticeable that there are some patterns to be investigated further in the context of urban developments and heat wave characteristics.Entities:
Keywords: Spearman correlation; green expansion intensity index; heat wave; urban expansion intensity index
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35805353 PMCID: PMC9265934 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19137688
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Urban area classes for 1992 and 2019 NLCD.
| Urban Area | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| NLCD 1992 Classes | NLCD 2019 Classes | ||
| Code | Classification Name | Code | Classification Name |
| 21 | Low Intensity Residential | 21 | Developed, Open Space |
| 22 | High Intensity Residential | 22 | Developed, Low Density |
| 23 | Commercial/Industrial/Transportation | 23 | Developed, Medium Density |
| 24 | Developed, High Density | ||
Green area classes for 1992 and 2019 NLCD.
| Green Area | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| NLCD 1992 Classes | NLCD 2019 Classes | ||
| Code | Classification Name | Code | Classification Name |
| 41 | Deciduous Forest | 41 | Deciduous Forest |
| 42 | Evergreen Forest | 42 | Evergreen Forest |
| 43 | Mixed Forest | 43 | Mixed Forest |
| 51 | Shrubland | 51 | Dwarf Shrub |
| 52 | Shrub | ||
| 71 | Grasslands/Herbaceous | 71 | Grassland/Herbaceous |
| 72 | Sedge/Herbaceous | ||
| 61 | Orchards/Vineyards/Other | 73 | Lichens |
| 62 | LULC Orchards/Vineyards/Other | 74 | Moss |
Figure 1Location of 49 cities in the study area.
Figure 2The proportion of urban and green areas in the study area.
Spearman correlation coefficient value and interpretation.
|
| Meaning |
|---|---|
| 0.00–0.19 | A very weak correlation |
| 0.20–0.39 | A weak correlation |
| 0.40–0.69 | A moderate correlation |
| 0.70–0.89 | A strong correlation |
| 0.90–1.00 | A very strong correlation |
This study used the value of coefficients to determine the relation between the characteristics of heatwaves and UEII and GEII.
Descriptive statistics of UEII for 1992–2019 for 49 U.S. cities.
| Feature | UEII Values (in Percentage) |
|---|---|
| Mean | 1.5 |
| Median | 1.53 |
| Standard Deviation | 0.61 |
| Range | 2.88 |
| Minimum | 0.22 |
| Maximum | 3.1 |
UEII range and class.
| UEII Range (in Percentage) | Class |
|---|---|
| 0.00–0.28 | Slow Development |
| 0.28–0.59 | Low-Speed Development |
| 0.59–1.05 | Medium-Speed Development |
| 1.05–1.92 | High-Speed Development |
| >1.92 | Very High-Speed Development |
Source: Al-Sharif, Pradhan, Shafri, and Mansor (2014) [35].
Top and bottom five U.S. cities with the highest and lowest UEII values.
| City Name | UEII Values (in Percentage) | |
|---|---|---|
| U.S. Cities with Highest UEII Values | St. Louis, MO | 3.1 |
| Chicago, IL | 2.5 | |
| Hartford, CT | 2.5 | |
| Detroit, MI | 2.5 | |
| Milwaukee, WI | 2.5 | |
| U.S. Cities with Lowest UEII Values | New Orleans, LA | 0.2 |
| Jacksonville, FL | 0.4 | |
| San Francisco, CA | 0.5 | |
| Norfolk, VA | 0.5 | |
| Nashville, TN | 0.8 |
Descriptive statistics of GEII for 1992–2019 for 49 U.S. cities.
| Feature | GEII Values (in Percentage) |
|---|---|
| Mean | 0.017 |
| Median | −0.1 |
| Standard Deviation | 0.43 |
| Range | 2.35 |
| Minimum | −0.9 |
| Maximum | 1.45 |
Top and bottom five U.S. cities with the highest and lowest GEII values.
| City Name | GEII Values (in Percentage) | |
|---|---|---|
| U.S. Cities with Highest GEII Values | Tucson, AZ | 1.45 |
| Phoenix, AZ | 1.13 | |
| Albuquerque, NM | 0.77 | |
| Covington, KY | 0.75 | |
| El Paso, TX | 0.65 | |
| U.S. Cities with Lowest GEII Values | Charlotte, NC | −0.9 |
| Knoxville, TN | −0.7 | |
| Raleigh, NC | −0.5 | |
| Atlanta, GA | −0.5 | |
| Portland, OR | −0.5 |
U.S. cities with the highest and lowest frequency, duration, season, and intensity change values.
| Frequency Change | Duration Change | Season Change | Intensity Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. Cities with Highest Change Values | New Orleans, LA | Fort Worth, TX | San Francisco, CA | Philadelphia, PA |
| Tampa, FL | New Orleans, LA | New Orleans, LA | Pittsburgh, PA | |
| Miami, FL | Salt Lake City, UT | Tampa, FL | Salt Lake City, UT | |
| Austin, TX | San Francisco, CA | Atlanta, GA | Boston, MA | |
| San Francisco, CA | Los Angeles, CA | Miami, FL | Cleveland, OH | |
| U.S. Cities with Lowest Change Values | Hartford, CT | Chicago, IL | Jacksonville, FL | San Antonio, TX |
| Los Angeles, CA | San Diego, CA | Indianapolis, IN | Indianapolis, IN | |
| San Diego, CA | St. Louis, MO | Buffalo, NY | Rochester, NY | |
| Rochester, NY | Rochester, NY | San Diego, CA | Memphis, TN | |
| Jacksonville, FL | Memphis, TN | Rochester, NY | Chicago, IL |
Spearman correlation between UEII, GEII, and heatwave frequency, duration, season, and intensity for 49 cities in the U.S.
|
Independent Variable, |
Dependent Variable, | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| GEII | Frequency Change | 0.5485 | 0.0878106 |
| GEII | Duration Change | 0.5717 | 0.08255102 |
| GEII | Season Change | 0.4877 | −0.1012245 |
| GEII | Intensity Change | 0.7397 | −0.04857143 |
| UEII | Frequency Change | 0.3794 | 0.1283739 |
| UEII | Duration Change | 0.03916 * | −0.2962245 * |
| UEII | Season Change | 0.5069 | −0.09683673 |
| UEII | Intensity Change | 0.02699 * | 0.3168367 * |
Note: * p < 0.05.
Spearman correlation between UEII, GEII, and heatwave frequency, duration, season, and intensity for 15 cities in North Region.
|
Independent Variable, |
Dependent Variable, | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| GEII | Frequency Change | 0.8025 | −0.07142857 |
| GEII | Duration Change | 0.2316 | 0.3285714 |
| GEII | Season Change | 0.2212 | −0.3357143 |
| GEII | Intensity Change | 0.8224 | −0.06428571 |
| UEII | Frequency Change | 0.2479 | 0.3178571 |
| UEII | Duration Change | 0.4578 | −0.2071429 |
| UEII | Season Change | 0.237 | 0.325 |
| UEII | Intensity Change | 0.3138 | −0.2785714 |
Spearman correlation between UEII, GEII, and heatwave frequency, duration, season, and intensity for 22 cities in the South Region.
|
Independent Variable, |
Dependent Variable, | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| GEII | Frequency Change | 0.3194 | −0.2219085 |
| GEII | Duration Change | 0.5112 | −0.1473744 |
| GEII | Season Change | 0.267 | −0.2467532 |
| GEII | Intensity Change | 0.7054 | −0.08526256 |
| UEII | Frequency Change | 0.6942 | −0.08865048 |
| UEII | Duration Change | 0.6942 | 0.08865048 |
| UEII | Season Change | 0.7509 | −0.0717109 |
| UEII | Intensity Change | 0.2784 | 0.2411067 |
Spearman correlation between UEII, GEII, and heatwave frequency, duration, season, and intensity for 12 cities in the West Region.
|
Independent Variable, |
Dependent Variable, | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| GEII | Frequency Change | 0.1542 | 0.4405594 |
| GEII | Duration Change | 0.5578 | 0.1888112 |
| GEII | Season Change | 0.8344 | −0.06993007 |
| GEII | Intensity Change | 0.9737 | −0.01398601 |
| UEII | Frequency Change | 0.4709 | 0.2307692 |
| UEII | Duration Change | 0.4709 | 0.2307692 |
| UEII | Season Change | 0.256 | 0.3566434 |
| UEII | Intensity Change | 0.03011 * | 0.6363636 * |
Note: * p < 0.05.
Figure 3The relationship between UEII and duration change values; (a) spatial pattern of UEII values; (b) spatial pattern of duration change values.
Figure 4The relationship between UEII and intensity change values; (a) spatial pattern of UEII values; (b) spatial pattern of intensity change values.