Combining Accuracy Assessment of Land-Cover Maps With Environmental Monitoring Programs

  • Stephen V. Stehman
  • Raymond L. Czaplewski
  • Sarah M. Nusser
  • Limin Yang
  • Zhiliang Zhu


A scientifically valid accuracy assessment of a large-area, land-cover map is expensive. Environmental monitoring programs offer a potential source of data to partially defray the cost of accuracy assessment while still maintaining the statistical validity. In this article, three general strategies for combining accuracy assessment and environmental monitoring protocols are described. These strategies range from a fully integrated accuracy assessment and environmental monitoring protocol, to one in which the protocols operate nearly independently. For all three strategies, features critical to using monitoring data for accuracy assessment include compatibility of the land-cover classification schemes, precisely co-registered sample data, and spatial and temporal compatibility of the map and reference data. Two monitoring programs, the National Resources Inventory (NRI) and the Forest Inventory and Monitoring (FIM), are used to illustrate important features for implementing a combined protocol.


data confidentiality multiple frame estimation photo interpretation probability sampling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, J.F., Hardy, E.E., Roach, J.T. and Witmer, R.E.: 1976, A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, 28 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Bricker, O.P., and Ruggiero, M.A.: 1998, ‘Toward a national program for monitoring environmental resources’, Ecological Applications 8, 326–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Czaplewski, R.L., and Catts, G.P.: 1992, ‘Calibration of remotely sensed proportion or area estimates for misclassification error’, Remote Sensing of Environment 39, 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. FGDC: 1997, ‘Vegetation classification standard’, Subcommittee of vegetation, Federal Geographic Data Committee web site,
  5. Gill, S.J., Milliken, J., Beardsley, D. and Warbington, R.: 1999, Assessing vegetation map accuracy using Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) data, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  6. Goebel, J.J., Schreuder, H.T., House, C.C., Geissler, P.H., Olsen, A.R. and Williams, W.R.: 1998, Integrating surveys of terrestrial natural resources: The Oregon Demonstration Project, Inventory and Monitoring Report No. 2, Fort Collins, CO, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 20 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Hartley, H.O.: 1974, ‘Multiple frame methodologies and selected applications’, Sankhya Ser. B 36, 99–118.Google Scholar
  8. House, C.C., Goebel, J.J., Schreuder, H.T., Geissler, P.H., Williams, W.R. and Olsen, A.R.: 1998, ‘Prototyping a vision for inter-agency terrestrial inventory and monitoring: A statistical perspective’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 51, 451–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Merchant, J.W., Yang, L. and Yang, W.: 1994, ‘Validation of continental-scale land cover data bases developed from AVHRR data’, Proceedings of Pecora XII Symposium, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, pp. 63–72.Google Scholar
  10. Milliken, J., Beardsley, D. and Gill, S.: 1998, ‘Accuracy assessment of a vegetation map of northeastern California using permanent plots and fuzzy sets in natural resources management using remote sensing’, Proceedings of the Seventh Forest Service Remote Sensing Applications Conference, April 1998, ASPRS Bethesda, MD, pp. 218–229.Google Scholar
  11. NSTC (National Science and Technology Council): 1997, Integrating the Nation’s Environmental Monitoring and Research Networks and Programs: A Proposed Framework, The Environmental Monitoring Team, Committee on Environment and Natural Resources, National Science and Technology Council, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  12. Nusser, S.M. and Goebel, J.J.; 1997, ‘The National Resources Inventory: a long-term multi-resource monitoring program’, Environmental and Ecological Statistics 4, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sarndal, C.E., Swensson, B. and Wretman, J.: 1992, Model-Assisted Survey Sampling, New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stehman, S.V. and Czaplewski, R.L.: 1998, ‘Design and analysis for thematic map accuracy assessment: Fundamental principles’, Remote Sensing of Environment 64, 331–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Story, M. and Congalton, R.G.: 1986, ‘Accuracy assessment: a user’s perspective’, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 52, 397–399.Google Scholar
  16. USFS: 1992, Forest Service Resource Inventories: An Overview, USGPO 1992-341-350/60861, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Inventory, Economics, and Recreation Research, Washington, DC, 39 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen V. Stehman
    • 1
  • Raymond L. Czaplewski
    • 2
  • Sarah M. Nusser
    • 3
  • Limin Yang
    • 4
  • Zhiliang Zhu
    • 4
  1. 1.SUNY ESF, 320 Bray HallSyracuseUSA
  2. 2.Rocky Mountain Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Department of StatisticsIowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  4. 4.USGS EROS Data CenterSioux FallsUSA

Personalised recommendations