Environmental and Ecological Statistics

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 361–377

GIS and geostatistics: Essential partners for spatial analysis

  • P.A. Burrough
Article

Abstract

Initially, geographical information systems (GIS) concentrated on two issues: automated map making, and facilitating the comparison of data on thematic maps. The first required high quality graphics, vector data models and powerful data bases, the second is based on grid cells that can be manipulated by suites of mathematical operators collectively termed “map algebra”. Both kinds of GIS are widely available and are taught in many universities and technical colleges. After more than 20 years of development, most standard GIS provide both kinds of functionality and good quality graphic display, but until recently they have not included the methods of statistics and geostatistics as tools for spatial analysis. Recently, standard statistical packages have been linked to GIS for both exploratory data analysis and statistical analysis and hypothesis testing. Standard statistical packages include methods for the analysis of random samples of cases or objects that are not necessarily co-located in space—if the results of statistical analysis display a spatial pattern then that is because the underlying data also share that pattern. Geostatistics addresses the need to make predictions of sampled attributes (i.e., maps) at unsampled locations from sparse, often expensive data. To make up for lack of hard data geostatistics has concentrated on the development of powerful methods based on stochastic theory. Though there have been recent moves to incorporate ancillary data in geostatistical analyses, insufficient attention has been paid to using modern methods of data display for the visualization of results. GIS can serve geostatistics by aiding geo-registration of data, facilitating spatial exploratory data analysis, providing a spatial context for interpolation and conditional simulation, as well as providing easy-to-use and effective tools for data display and visualization. The value of geostatistics for GIS lies in the provision of reliable interpolation methods with known errors, methods of upscaling and generalization, and for supplying multiple realizations of spatial patterns that can be used in environmental modeling. These stochastic methods are improving understanding of how errors in models of spatial processes accrue from errors in data or incompleteness in the structure of the models. New developments in GIS, based on ideas taken from map algebra, cellular automata and image analysis are providing high level programming languages for modeling dynamic processes such as erosion or the development of alluvial fans and deltas. Research has demonstrated that these models need stochastic inputs to yield realistic results. Non-stochastic tools such as fuzzy subsets have been shown to be useful for spatial analysis when probabilistic approaches are inappropriate or impossible. The conclusion is that in spite of differences in history and approach, the linkage of GIS, statistics and geostatistics provides a powerful, and complementary suite of tools for spatial analysis in the agricultural, earth and environmental sciences.

geographic information systems geostatistics statistical methods spatial analysis environmental modeling map algebra fuzzy sets 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bailey, T.C. and Gatrell, A.C. (1995) Interactive Spatial Data Analysis, Longman, Harlow, 413 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Bierkens, M.F.P. (1994) Complex Confining Layers: A Stochastic Analysis of Hydraulic Properties at Various Scales, Royal Dutch Geographical Association (KNAW)/Faculty of Geographical Sciences, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, NL.Google Scholar
  3. Burrough, P.A. (1996) Opportunities and limitations of GIS-based modeling of solute transport at the regional scale. In: Application of GIS to the Modeling of Non-Point Source Pollutants in the Vadose Zone, SSSA Special Publication 48, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, 19-37.Google Scholar
  4. Burrough, P.A. and Frank, A. (1996) (eds), Geographic Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries, GISDATA Series 2, Taylor and Francis, London.Google Scholar
  5. Burrough, P.A., van Gaans, P.F.M., and MacMillan, R.A. (2000) High-resolution landform classification using fuzzy k-means. Journal of Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 113, 37-52.Google Scholar
  6. Burrough, P.A., van Gaans, P.F.M., Wilson, J., and Hansen, A.J. (2001) Fuzzy k-means classification of topo-climatic data as an aid to forest mapping in the Greater Yellowstone Area, USA. Landscape Ecology, 16, 523-46.Google Scholar
  7. Burrough, P.A. and McDonnell, R.A. (1998) Principles of Geographical Information Systems, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 330 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Burrough, P.A. and Swindell J. (1997) Optimal mapping of site-specific multivariate soil properties. In Precision Agriculture: Spatial and Temporal Variability of Environmental Quality, J. Lake, G. Bock, and J. Goode (eds), Proc: CIBA Foundation Symposium 210, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 208-20.Google Scholar
  9. Burrough, P.A., van der Perk, M., Howard, B., Prister, B., Sansone, U., and Voitsekhovitch, O.V. (1999a) Environmental mobility of Radiocaesium in the Pripyat Catchment, Ukraine/Belarus. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 110, 35-55.Google Scholar
  10. Burrough, P.A., van Gaans, P.F.M., and MacMillan, R.A. (2000) High-resolution landform classification using fuzzy k-means. Journal of Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 113, 37-52.Google Scholar
  11. Canters, F. (1997) Evaluating the uncertainty of area estimates derived from fuzzy land-cover classification. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 63, 403-14.Google Scholar
  12. Coppock, J.T. and Rhind, D.W. (1991) The history of GIS. In: Geographical Information Systems, Vol. 1, Principle, D.J. Maguire, M.F. Goodchild, and D.W. Rhind (eds), Longman Scientific and Technical, New York, pp. 21-43.Google Scholar
  13. Cressie, N. (1991) Statistics for Spatial Data, Wiley, New York, 900 pp.Google Scholar
  14. De Gruijter, J.J., de Walvoort, D., and van Gaans, P. (1997) Continuous soil maps—a fuzzy set approach to bridge the gap between aggregation levels of process and distribution models. Geoderma, 77, 169-95.Google Scholar
  15. Deutsch, C. and Journel, A.G. (1998) GSLIB Geostatistical Handbook, 2nd edition, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Fisher, P.F. (1995) An exploration of probable viewsheds in landscape planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 22, 527-46.Google Scholar
  17. Goméz-Hernández, J.J. and Journel, A.G. (1992) Joint sequential simulation of multigaussian fields. In: A. Soares (ed), Proc. Fourth Geostatistics Congress, Troia, Portugal. Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics, (5), 85-94, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Goovaerts, P. (1997) Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation, Oxford University Press, 483 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Goovaerts, P. (1999) Using elevation to aid the geostatistical mapping of rainfall erosivity. CATENA, 34, 227-42.Google Scholar
  20. Heuvelink, G.B.M. (1998) Error Propagation in Environmental Modeling, Taylor and Francis, London, 127 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Heuvelink, G.B.M. and Burrough, P.A. (1993) Error propagation in cartographic modeling using Boolean logic and continuous classification. Int. J. Geographical Information Systems, 7, 231-46.Google Scholar
  22. Heuvelink, G.B.M. and Lemmens, T. (2000) (eds), Accuracy 2000. Proceedings of the 4th International Meeting on Accuracy in Spatial Data, Amsterdam, July, Delft University Press, Delft.Google Scholar
  23. Karssenberg, D.J., Torqvist, T., and Bridges, J. (2001) Conditioning a process-based model of sedimentatry architecture to well data. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 71(6).Google Scholar
  24. Lagacherie, P., Andrieux, P., and Bouzigues, R. (1996) Fuzziness and uncertainty of soil boundaries: from reality to coding in GIS. In: P.A. Burrough and A.U. Frank (eds), Geographical Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries, Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 275-86.Google Scholar
  25. Liverpool, T. and Edwards, S. (1995) Modeling meandering rivers. Physical Review Letters, 75, 3016.Google Scholar
  26. Matheron, G. (1965) La Theorie des Variables Regionalisee et ses Applications, Masson, Paris.Google Scholar
  27. Mitasova, H. and Hofierka, J. (1993) Interpolation by regularized spline with tension: Application to terrain modeling and surface geometry analysis. Mathematical Geology, 25, 657-69.Google Scholar
  28. Pannatier, Y. (1996) Variowin. Software for spatial data analysis in 2D. Statistics and Computing, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 91 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Pebesma, E. and Wesseling, C.G. (1998) GSTAT: A program for geostatistical modeling, prediction and simulation. Computers and Geosciences, 24, 17-31.Google Scholar
  30. Pereira, J.M.C., Carreiras, J.M.B., and Perestrello de Vasconcelos, M.J. (1998) Exploratory data analysis of the spatial distribution of wildfires in Portugal 1980–1989. Geographical Systems, 5, 355-90.Google Scholar
  31. Takeyama, M. and Couclelis, H.M. (1997) Map dynamics: integrating cellular automata and GIS through Geo-Algebra. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 11, 73-92.Google Scholar
  32. Tukey, J.W. (1977) Exploratory data analysis, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusets.Google Scholar
  33. Van Deursen, W.P.A. and Wesseling, C.G. (1995) PCRaster, Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  34. Wesseling, C.G., Karssenberg, D., Burrough, P.A., and van Deursen, W.P.A. (1996) Integrating dynamic environmental models in GIS: The development of a dynamic modeling language. Transactions in GIS 1, 40-8.Google Scholar
  35. Wise, S., Haining, R., and Ma, J. (2001) Providing spatial statistical data analysis functionality for the GIS user. The SAGE project. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15, 239-254.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • P.A. Burrough
    • 1
  1. 1.Utrecht Centre for Environment and Landscape Dynamics (UCEL), Faculty of Geographical SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations