Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Addressing foundational elements of regional land-use change forecasting

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Regional land-use models must address several foundational elements, including understanding geographic setting, establishing regional land-use histories, modeling process and representing drivers of change, representing local land-use patterns, managing issues of scale and complexity, and development of scenarios. Key difficulties include managing an array of biophysical and socioeconomic processes across multiple spatial and temporal scales, and acquiring and utilizing empirical data to support the analysis of those processes. The Southeastern and Pacific Northwest regions of the United States, two heavily forested regions with significant forest industries, are examined in the context of these foundational elements. Geographic setting fundamentally affects both the primary land cover (forest) in the two regions, and the structure and form of land use (forestry). Land-use histories of the regions can be used to parameterize land-use models, validate model performance, and explore land-use scenarios. Drivers of change in the two regions are many and varied, with issues of scale and complexity posing significant challenges. Careful scenario development can be used to simplify process-based land-use models, and can improve our ability to address specific research questions. The successful modeling of land-use change in these two areas requires integration of both top-down and bottom-up drivers of change, using scenario frameworks to both guide and simplify the modeling process. Modular approaches, with utilization and integration of existing process models, allow regional land-use modelers the opportunity to better represent primary drivers of land-use change. However, availability of data to represent driving forces remains a primary obstacle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aber J, Neilson RP, McNulty S et al (2001) Forest processes and global environmental change: predicting the effects of individual and multiple stressors. Bioscience 51:735–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown DG, Goovaerts P, Burnicki A et al (2002) Stochastic simulation of land-cover change using geostatistics and generalized additive models. Photogramm Eng Rem S 68:1051–1061

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton DM, McCarl BA, de Sousa CNM et al (1997) Economic impacts of climate change on southern forests. Texas A&M University, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Claggett PR, Jantz CA, Goetz SJ et al (2004) Assessing development pressure in the Chesapeake bay watershed: an evaluation of two land-use change models. Environ Monit Assess 94:129–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conner RC, Hartsell AJ (2002) Forest area and conditions. In: Wear DN, Greis JG (eds) Southern forest resource assessment. General technical report SRS-53. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, pp 357–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Couclelis H (2002) Why I no longer work with agents: a challenge for ABMs of human-environment interactions. In: Parker DC, Berger T, Manson SM (eds) Agent-based models of land-use and land-cover change. Report and Review of an International Workshop, Irvine, 4–7 October 2001

  • Daniels JM (2005) The rise and fall of the Pacific northwest log market. General technical report PNW-GTR-624. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallant AL, Loveland TR, Sohl TL et al (2004) Using an ecoregion framework to analyze land-cover and land-use dynamics. Environ Manage 34:S89–S110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geoghegan J, Pritchard L Jr, Ogneva-Himmelberger Y et al (1998) “Socializing the pixel” and “pixelizing the social” in land-use and land-cover change. In: Liverman D, Moran EF, Rindfuss RR, Stern PC (eds) People and pixels. National Research Council, Washington, DC, pp 51–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes RW (2003) An analysis of the timber situation in the United States:1952 to 2050. General technical report PNW-GTR-560. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertel TW (1997) Global trade analysis: modelling and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin EG, Geoghegan J (2001) Theory, data, methods: developing spatially explicit economic models of land use change. Agric Ecosyst Environ 85:7–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline JD, Alig RJ (2001) A spatial model of land use change for western Oregon and western Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland. Research Paper PNW-RP-528

  • Lane CL (1998) Log export and import restrictions of the U.S. Pacific northwest and British Columbia: past and present. General technical report PNW-GTR-436. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang Y, Durrans SR, Lightsey T (2002) A revised version of PnET-II to simulate the hydrologic cycle in southeastern forested areas. J Am Water Resour Assess 38:79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loveland TR, Sohl TL, Stehman SV et al (2002) A strategy for estimating the rates of recent United States land-cover changes. Photogramm Eng Rem S 68:1091–1099

    Google Scholar 

  • Loveland TR, Gutman G, Buford M et al (2003) Chapter 6: land use/land cover change. In: Strategic plan for the climate change science program. U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Washington, pp 118–134

  • Marcucci DJ (2000) Landscape history as a planning tool. Landsc Urban Plan 49:67–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews R, Gilbert N, Roach A et al (2007) Agent-based land-use models: a review of applications. Landscape Ecol 22:1447–1459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarl BA, Adams DM, Alig RJ et al (2000) Effects of global climate change on the U.S. forest sector: response functions derived from a dynamic resource and market simulator. Clim Res 15:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNulty SG, Aber JD (2001) U.S. national climate change assessment on forest ecosystems: an introduction. BioScience 51:720–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNulty SG, Vose JM, Swank WT (1996) Potential climate change effects on loblolly pine forest productivity and drainage across the southern United States. Ambio 25:449–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Naveh Z (2001) Ten major premises for a holistic conception of multifunctional landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 57:269–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 77:118–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker DC, Berger T, Manson SM (eds) (2002) Agent-based models of land-use and land-cover change. Report and review of an international workshop, Irvine

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker DC, Manson SM, Janssen MA et al (2004) Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: a review. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 93:314–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pontius RG, Spencer J (2005) Uncertainty in extrapolations of predictive land-change models. Environ Plan B Plan Des 32:211–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pontius RG, Boersma W, Castella J, Clarke K, de Nijs T, Dietzel C, Duan Z, Fotsing E, Goldstein N, Kok K, Koomen E, Lippitt CD, McConnell W, Sood AM, Pijanowski B, Pithadia S, Sweeney S, Trung TN, Veldkamp AT, Verburg PH (2008) Comparing the input, output, and validation maps for several models of land change. Ann Reg Sci 42:11–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poudevigne I, Baudry J (2003) The implication of past and present landscape patterns for biodiversity research: introduction and overview. Landscape Ecol 18:223–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindfuss RR, Walsh SJ, Turner BL II et al (2004) Developing a science of land change: challenges and methodological issues. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101:976–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohl TL, Sayler KL (2008) Using the FORE-SCE model to project land-cover change in the southeastern United States. Ecol Model 219:49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohl TL, Gallant AL, Loveland TR (2004) The characteristics and interpretability of land surface change and implications for project design. Photogramm Eng Rem S 70:439–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohl TL, Sayler KL, Drummond MA et al (2007) The FORE-SCE model: a practical approach for projecting land use change using scenario-based modeling. J Land Use Sci 2:102–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spies TA, Ripple WJ, Bradshaw GA (1994) Dynamics and pattern of a managed coniferous forest landscape in Oregon. Ecol Appl 4:555–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strengers B, Leemans R, Eickhout B et al (2004) The land-use projections and resulting emissions in the IPCC SRES scenarios as simulated by the IMAGE 2.2 model. GeoJ 61:381–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin CD (1990) Geographic information systems and cartographic modeling. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Trani MK (2002) Terrestrial ecosystems. In: Wear DN, Greis JG (eds) Southern forest resource assessment. General technical report SRS-53. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Wear DN, Flamm RO (1996) Land ownership and land-cover change in the southern Appalachian Highlands and the Olympic Peninsula. Ecol Appl 6:1150–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburg PH (2006) Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models. Landscape Ecol 21:1171–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburg PH, Veldkamp A (2004) Projecting land use transitions at forest fringes in the Philippines at two spatial scales. Landscape Ecol 19:77–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburg PH, Schot P, Dijst M et al (2004) Land use change modeling: current practice and research priorities. GeoJ 61:309–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburg PH, Eickhout B, van Meijl H (2008) A multi-scale, multi-model approach for analyzing the future dynamics of European land use. Ann Reg Sci 42:57–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallin DO, Swanson FJ, Marks B (1994) Landscape pattern response to changes in pattern generation rules: land-use legacies in forestry. Ecol Appl 4:569–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wear DN, Greis JG (eds) (2002) Southern forest resource assessment. General technical report SRS-53. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville

    Google Scholar 

  • Wear DN, Liu R, Foreman JM et al (1999) The effects of population growth on timber management and inventories in Virginia. For Ecol Manag 118:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimberly MC, Ohmann JL (2004) A multi-scale assessment of human and environmental constraints on forest land cover change on the Oregon (USA) coast range. Landscape Ecol 19:631–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu X, Hu Y, He HS et al (2008) Performance evaluation of the SLEUTH model in the Shenyang metropolitan area of northeastern China. Environ Model Assess 13:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zampella RA, Procopio NA, Lathrop RG et al (2007) Relationship of land-use/land-cover patterns and surface-water quality in the Mullica river basin. J Am Water Resour Assess 43:594–604

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Zhang D, Schelhas J (2005) Small-scale non-industrial private forest ownership in the United States: rationale and implications for forest management. Silva Fenn 39:443–454

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by the US Geological Survey’s (USGS) Geographic Analysis and Monitoring Program with support from NASA’s Land Cover and Land Use Change Program. Christopher Barnes’ participation is supported through USGS contract 08HQCN0005 with Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT) Inc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Geological Survey, Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, SD, 57198, USA

    Terry L. Sohl, Thomas R. Loveland & Kristi L. Sayler

  2. US Geological Survey, Western Geographic Science Center, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, USA

    Benjamin M. Sleeter

  3. SGT Inc., Contractor to US Geological Survey, Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, SD, 57198, USA

    Christopher A. Barnes

Authors
  1. Terry L. Sohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas R. Loveland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benjamin M. Sleeter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kristi L. Sayler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher A. Barnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terry L. Sohl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sohl, T.L., Loveland, T.R., Sleeter, B.M. et al. Addressing foundational elements of regional land-use change forecasting. Landscape Ecol 25, 233–247 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9391-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9391-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation