Mapping deforestation and urban expansion in Freetown, Sierra Leone, from pre- to post-war economic recovery

  • Lamin R. MansarayEmail author
  • Jingfeng Huang
  • Alimamy A. Kamara


Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone has experienced vast land-cover changes over the past three decades. In Sierra Leone, however, availability of updated land-cover data is still a problem even for environmental managers. This study was therefore, conducted to provide up-to-date land-cover data for Freetown. Multi-temporal Landsat data at 1986, 2001, and 2015 were obtained, and a maximum likelihood supervised classification was employed. Eight land-cover classes or categories were recognized as follows: water, wetland, built-up, dense forest, sparse forest, grassland, barren, and mangrove. Land-cover changes were mapped via post-classification change detection. The persistence, gain, and loss of each land-cover class, and selected land conversions were also quantified. An overall classification accuracy of 87.3 % and a Kappa statistic of 0.85 were obtained for the 2015 map. From 1986 to 2015, water, built-up, grassland, and barren had net gains, whereas forests, wetlands, and mangrove had net loses. Conversion analyses among forests, grassland, and built-up show that built-up had targeted grassland and avoided forests. This study also revealed that, the overall land-cover change at 2001–2015 was higher (28.5 %) than that recorded at 1986–2001 (20.9 %). This is attributable to the population increase in Freetown and the high economic growth and infrastructural development recorded countrywide after the civil war. In view of the rapid land-cover change and its associated environmental impacts, this study recommends the enactment of policies that would strike a balance between urbanization and environmental sustainability in Freetown.


Freetown Land-cover Change detection Civil war Population growth GDP growth 



This study was financially supported by the Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute (SLARI) within the institutional research priority area of: “appropriate mechanisms for managing, sharing and up-scaling environmental information and technologies established and operationalized.” The authors wish to express their sincere thanks and appreciation to two anonymous reviewers whose comments and advice were useful in shaping the contents and structure of this manuscript.


  1. Aldwaik, S. Z., & Pontius, R. G. (2012). Intensity analysis to unify measurements of size and stationarity of land changes by interval, category, and transition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 106(1), 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Owojori, & H Xie (2005). Landsat image-based LULC changes of San Antonio, Texas using advanced atmospheric correction and object-oriented image analysis approaches. In 5th International symposium on remote sensing of urban areas, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
  3. Bolstad, P. V., & Lillesand, T. M. (1991). Rapid maximum likelihood classification. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 57(1), 67–74.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, J. E. (2003). Human population: the next half century. Science, 302(5648), 1172–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dewan, A. M., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2009). Land use and land cover change in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh: using remote sensing to promote sustainable urbanization. Applied Geography, 29(3), 390–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dewidar, K. M. (2004). Detection of land use/land cover changes for the northern part of the Nile delta (Burullus region), Egypt. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 25(20), 4079–4089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. F Dixey (1922). The physiography of Sierra Leone. Geographical Journal, 41–61.Google Scholar
  8. Fan, F., Weng, Q., & Wang, Y. (2007). Land use and land cover change in Guangzhou, China, from 1998 to 2003, based on Landsat TM/ETM+ imagery. Sensors, 7(7), 1323–1342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foody, G. M., & Mathur, A. (2004). Toward intelligent training of supervised image classifications: directing training data acquisition for SVM classification. Remote Sensing of Environment, 93(1), 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forkuor, G., & Cofie, O. (2011). Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in Freetown, Sierra Leone and its effects on urban and peri-urban agriculture–a remote sensing approach. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 32(4), 1017–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haregeweyn, N., Tesfaye, S., Tsunekawa, A., Tsubo, M., Meshesha, D. T., Adgo, E., & Elias, A. (2015). Dynamics of land use and land cover and its effects on hydrologic responses: case study of the Gilgel Tekeze catchment in the highlands of northern Ethiopia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huang, J., Pontius, R. G., Li, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Use of intensity analysis to link patterns with processes of land change from 1986 to 2007 in a coastal watershed of Southeast China. Applied Geography, 34, 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. J R Anderson (1976). A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data (Vol. 964). US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  14. Lillesand, T., Kiefer, R. W., & J. Chipman (2014). Remote sensing and image interpretation. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  15. Long, H., Tang, G., Li, X., & Heilig, G. K. (2007). Socio-economic driving forces of land-use change in Kunshan, the Yangtze River Delta economic area of China. Journal of Environmental Management, 83(3), 351–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Malmir, M., Zarkesh, M. M. K., Monavari, S. M., Jozi, S. A., & Sharifi, E. (2015). Urban development change detection based on multi-temporal satellite images as a fast tracking approach—a case study of Ahwaz County, southwestern Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(3), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Misra, A., & Balaji, R. (2015). Decadal changes in the land use/land cover and shoreline along the coastal districts of southern Gujarat, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(7), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mundia, C. N., & Aniya, M. (2005). Analysis of land use/cover changes and urban expansion of Nairobi city using remote sensing and GIS. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 26(13), 2831–2849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Munyati, C. (2000). Wetland change detection on the Kafue flats, Zambia, by classification of a multitemporal remote sensing image dataset. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 21(9), 1787–1806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schlerf, M., Borens, S., Seeling, S., & J Hill (2007). Land use and land cover change analysis in Rhineland-Palatinate based on multi-temporal image classification. Mitteilungen aus der Forschungsanstalt fur Waldokologie und Forstwirtschaft Rheinland-Pfalz, pp., 237, 245.Google Scholar
  21. Seto, K. C., & Kaufmann, R. K. (2003). Modeling the drivers of urban land use change in the Pearl River Delta, China: integrating remote sensing with socioeconomic data. Land Economics, 79(1), 106–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Soffianian, A., & Madanian, M. (2015). Monitoring land cover changes in Isfahan Province, Iran using Landsat satellite data. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(8), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sierra Leone population and housing census; provisional results, Statistics Sierra Leone, 2016.Google Scholar
  24. Sun, Z., Ma, R., & Wang, Y. (2009). Using Landsat data to determine land use changes in Datong basin, China. Environmental Geology, 57(8), 1825–1837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wilson, S. A., & Wilson, C. O. (2013). Modelling the impacts of civil war on land use and land cover change within Kono District, Sierra Leone: a socio-geospatial approach. Geocarto International, 28(6), 476–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yang, X., & Liu, Z. (2005). Using satellite imagery and GIS for land-use and land-cover change mapping in an estuarine watershed. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 26(23), 5275–5296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yousefi, S., Khatami, R., Mountrakis, G., Mirzaee, S., Pourghasemi, H. R., & Tazeh, M. (2015). Accuracy assessment of land cover/land use classifiers in dry and humid areas of Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(10), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yuan, F., Sawaya, K. E., Loeffelholz, B. C., & Bauer, M. E. (2005). Land cover classification and change analysis of the twin cities (Minnesota) metropolitan area by multitemporal Landsat remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 98(2), 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lamin R. Mansaray
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Jingfeng Huang
    • 2
    • 3
  • Alimamy A. Kamara
    • 1
  1. 1.Magbosi Land, Water and Environment Research Center (MLWERC)Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute (SLARI)Northern ProvinceSierra Leone
  2. 2.Institute of Remote Sensing and Information Application, College of Environmental and Resource SciencesZhejiang UniversityHangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of Agricultural Remote Sensing and Information SystemsHangzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations