Advertisement

Digital Technologies for Assessing Land Use, Crop Mapping and Irrigation in Community Watersheds

Chapter
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

Land-use analysis, cropping pattern and sources of irrigation are important for planning and improving the rural economic aspects. Geospatial method was adopted for deriving and analysing the land use at micro-level in Kothapally Village covering parts of Adarsha watershed. The village is characterised by a large number of marginal holdings, and the average holding of 0.96 ha. is lesser than that in Telangana state. Kothapally is characterised by agriculture, and the land put to non-agricultural use is 9.31%. Migration to urban areas, selling road side land for commercial purposes and alienated lands not being cultivated by the poor have been found to be the main reasons for fallow lands. Cropping systems comprise of cereals, pulses, fruits, commercial crops, vegetables, flowers and plantations. Over the years’ extent of cereals have remained almost same, with sorghum cultivation almost stopped. Pigeon pea appears to be gaining prominence and area under cotton has doubled. Sugarcane has disappeared.

Rainfall is the only source of irrigation in Kothapally. Groundwater is being used for irrigating 109.49 ha. Groundwater withdrawal is on the rise and shallow open wells are becoming unusable. Different types of rainwater harvesting have been adopted. Though interventions have yielded better results, more demand for water has caused more exploitation of groundwater. The village has all the required basic infrastructural facilities, and the wastewater treatment facilities built as part of watershed management interventions are appreciated by the community. Almost all the houses have sanitary facilities and are connected with underground drainage.

Keywords

Land use Marginal holdings Cropping pattern Pigeon pea Cotton Sugarcane 

References

  1. James R. Anderson, Ernest E. Hardy, John T. Roach, and Richard E. Witmer (1976). Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, A revision of the land use classification system as presented in U.S. Geological Survey Circular 671.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, C. P. (1936). Land classification: Objectives and requirements, U. S. Resettlement Administration and Utilization Division, Land Use Planning Publication I, pp. 35–36.Google Scholar
  3. Bernetti, I., & Marinelli, N. (2010). Evaluation of landscape impacts and land use change: A Tuscan case study for CAP reform scenarios. AESTIMUM, 56(Giugno), 1–29.Google Scholar
  4. Bernetti I., Franciosi, C., & Lombardi, G. (2006). Land use change and the multifunctional role of agriculture: A spatial prediction model in an Italian rural area. International Journal of Agrarian Research, 5(2/3).Google Scholar
  5. Castelluccio, M., Poggi, G., Sansone, C., Verdoliva, L. (2015). Land use classification in remote sensing images by convolutional neural networks. arXiv:1508.00092v1 [cs.CV] 1 Aug 2015.Google Scholar
  6. CEC [Commission of the European Communities]. (1993). CORINE land cover – Guide technique. Brussels.Google Scholar
  7. Chattopadhyay, S., Krishna Kumar, P., & Rajalekshmi, K. (1999). Panchayat resource mapping to panchayat – Level planning in Kerala: An analytical study. Kerala research Programme for local level development. Thiruvanthapuram: Centre for Development Studies.Google Scholar
  8. Dadhwal, V. K., Singh, R. P., Dutta, S., & Parihar, J. S. (2002). Remote sensing based crop inventory: A review of Indian experience. Tropical Ecology, 43(1), 107–122. 2002 ISSN 0564-3295.Google Scholar
  9. De Wit, P., & Verheye, W. (2009). Land use planning for sustainable development. Land use, land cover and soil sciences (Vol. III). Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment.
  10. Di Gregorio, A., & Jansen, L. J. M. (2000). Land cover classification system (LCCS): Classification concepts and user manual. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  11. Eiten, G. (1968). Vegetation forms. A classification of stands of vegetation based on structure, growth form of the components, and vegetative periodicity (Boletim do Instituto de Botanica (San Paulo), No. 4).Google Scholar
  12. FAO. (1976). A framework of land evaluation. FAO Soils Bulletin, 32, Rome, p. 77.Google Scholar
  13. Fosberg, F. R. (1961). A classification of vegetation for general purposes. Tropical Ecology, 2, 1–28.Google Scholar
  14. Jadab Chandra Halder (2013). Land use/land cover and change detection mapping in Binpur-II block, Paschim Medinipur District, West Bengal: A remote sensing and GIS perspective. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 8, Issue 5, March–April (2013), PP 2031.Google Scholar
  15. Hettig, E., Lay, J., & Sipangule, K. (2016). Drivers of households’ land-use decisions: A critical review of micro-level studies in tropical regions. Land, (5), 32.  https://doi.org/10.3390/land5040032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ICRISAT. (2004). Watershed management and livelihood options, survey data.Google Scholar
  17. Kannadasan, K., Ganesh, A., & Vinothkanna, S. (2017). An analysis of nine fold classification land use land cover changes In Tiruvannamalai District, Tamil Nadu, India. International Education & Research Journal [IERJ] E-ISSN No: 2454-9916|Volume: 3|Issue: 6|June 2017.Google Scholar
  18. Karlsson, I., & Rydén, L. (2012). Rural development and land use. ISBN 978-91-86189-11-2.Google Scholar
  19. Kristina Nilsson, L., & Rydén, L. (2012). Spatial planning and management, in rural development and land use (I. Karlsson and L. Rydén, Eds.). ISBN 978-91-86189-11-2.Google Scholar
  20. Kuechler, A. W., & Zonneveld, I. S. (Eds). (1988). Vegetation mapping (Handbook of vegetation science, Vol. 10). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  21. Lambin, E. F., Geist, H. J., & Lepers, E. (2003). Dynamics of land-use and land cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28, 205–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mandal, R. B. (1990). Land utilization: Theory and practice (pp. 24–41). New Delhi: Concept Pub. 130-169.Google Scholar
  23. Marsh, W. M. (1991). Landscape planning: Environmental applications (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Miller, D., Matthews, K., Buchan, K.. (2012). Determining the land use and farm-type mixes of land capability for agriculture class groupings in the regions of Scotland and the characteristics of holdings containing both land capability for agriculture classes 1 to 5.3 and 6.1 to 7 land. The James Hutton Institute.Google Scholar
  25. Mueller-Dombois, D., & Ellenberg, J. H. (1974). Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. New York/London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Naik, G., Basavaraj, K. P., Hegde, V. R., Paidi, V., & Subramanian, A. (2013). Using geospatial technology to strengthen data systems in developing countries: The case of agricultural statistics in India. Applied Geography, 43(2013), 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petja, B., Nesamvuni, E., & Nkoana, A. (2014). Using geospatial information technology for rural agricultural development planning in the Nebo Plateau. South Africa: Journal of Agricultural Science, 6(4), 2014.Google Scholar
  28. PIB. (2015). Press Information Bureau Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare; Highlights of Agriculture Census 2010–11.Google Scholar
  29. Premakumar, K., & Vinothkanna, S. (2015). Spatio-temporal analysis of land use in Palakkad District, Kerala. International Journal of Current Research, 7(11) (ISSN: 0975-833X).Google Scholar
  30. Richards, J. F., & Flint, E. P. (1994). Historic land use and carbon estimates for South and Southeast Asia: 1880–1980.  https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIA/lue.ndp046.
  31. Roy, P. S., & Giriraj, A. (2008). Land use and land cover analysis in Indian context. Journal of Applied Sciences, 8, 1346–1353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. SD21. (2012). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
  33. Sen, P. (2016). Shaping the fringes for the expansion of cities-a study on Hoskote in the greater Bengaluru urban area. Transactions, 38(1), 2016.Google Scholar
  34. Sokal, R. (1974). Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185(4157), 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sombroek, W. (1992). Land use planning and productive capacity assessment, FAO.Google Scholar
  36. Sreedevi, T. K., Shiferaw, B., & Wani, S. P. (2004). Adarsha watershed in Kothapally: Understanding the drivers of higher impact (Global theme on agroecosystems report no. 10). Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 24 pp.Google Scholar
  37. Stamp, L. D. (1951). Land for tomorrow: The under-developed world, Bloomingtom, 1951.Google Scholar
  38. Suresh Kumar, S. (2014). Land accounting in India: Issues and concerns. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeales/egm/LandAcctIndia.pdf. Contribution to System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012—Experimental Ecosystem Accounting. United Nations.
  39. Tian, H., Banger, K., Bo, T., & Dadhwal, V. K. (2014). History of land use in India during 1880–2010: Large-scale land transformations reconstructed from satellite data and historical archives. Global and Planetary Change, 121(2014), 78–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tiwari, R., Indu, K. M., Killi, J., Kandula, K., Bhat, P., Ramjee Nagarajan, R., Kommu, V., Kameshwar, R. K., & Ravindranath, N. H. (2010). Land use dynamics in select village ecosystems of southern India: Drivers and implications. Journal of Land Use Science, 5(3), 197–215.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2010.500683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. UNESCO. (1973). International classification and mapping of vegetation. Paris.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pixel Softek Pvt. LtdBengaluruIndia
  2. 2.Former Theme Leader, Policy and Impact, Research Program-AsiaInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)HyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations