IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p4038-d782241.html

Modeling of Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) Change Based on Artificial Neural Networks for the Chapecó River Ecological Corridor, Santa Catarina/Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Juliana Mio de Souza

    (Agricultural Research and Extension Service Institution of the State of Santa Catarina, Rua Admar Gonzaga, 1347, Itacorubi, Florianópolis 88034-901, Brazil
    Centre of Geographical Studies, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning, University of Lisbon, Rua Branca Edmée Marques, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Paulo Morgado

    (Centre of Geographical Studies, Associated Laboratory TERRA, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning, University of Lisbon, Rua Branca Edmée Marques, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Eduarda Marques da Costa

    (Centre of Geographical Studies, Associated Laboratory TERRA, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning, University of Lisbon, Rua Branca Edmée Marques, 1600-276 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Luiz Fernando de Novaes Vianna

    (Agricultural Research and Extension Service Institution of the State of Santa Catarina, Rua Admar Gonzaga, 1347, Itacorubi, Florianópolis 88034-901, Brazil)

Abstract

The simulation and analysis of future land use and land cover—LULC scenarios using artificial neural networks (ANN)—has been applied in the last 25 years, producing information for environmental and territorial policy making and implementation. LULC changes have impacts on many levels, e.g., climate change, biodiversity and ecosystem services, soil quality, which, in turn, have implications for the landscape. Therefore, it is fundamental that planning is informed by scientific evidence. The objective of this work was to develop a geographic model to identify the main patterns of LULC transitions between the years 2000 and 2018, to simulate a baseline scenario for the year 2036, and to assess the effectiveness of the Chapecó River ecological corridor (an area created by State Decree No. 2.957/2010), regarding the recovery and conservation of forest remnants and natural fields. The results indicate that the forest remnants have tended to recover their area, systematically replacing silviculture areas. However, natural fields (grassland) are expected to disappear in the near future if proper measures are not taken to protect this ecosystem. If the current agricultural advance pattern is maintained, only 0.5% of natural fields will remain in the ecological corridor by 2036. This LULC trend exposes the low effectiveness of the ecological corridor (EC) in protecting and restoring this vital ecosystem.

Suggested Citation

  • Juliana Mio de Souza & Paulo Morgado & Eduarda Marques da Costa & Luiz Fernando de Novaes Vianna, 2022. "Modeling of Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) Change Based on Artificial Neural Networks for the Chapecó River Ecological Corridor, Santa Catarina/Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4038-:d:782241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4038/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4038/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angeliki Peponi & Paulo Morgado & Jorge Trindade, 2019. "Combining Artificial Neural Networks and GIS Fundamentals for Coastal Erosion Prediction Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Rahel Hamad & Heiko Balzter & Kamal Kolo, 2018. "Predicting Land Use/Land Cover Changes Using a CA-Markov Model under Two Different Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Jonathan A. Foley & Navin Ramankutty & Kate A. Brauman & Emily S. Cassidy & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Christine O’Connell & Deepak K. Ray & Paul C. West & Christian Balz, 2011. "Solutions for a cultivated planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 337-342, October.
    4. Svajone Bekesiene & Rasa Smaliukiene & Ramute Vaicaitiene, 2021. "Using Artificial Neural Networks in Predicting the Level of Stress among Military Conscripts," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Zaheer Abbas & Guang Yang & Yuanjun Zhong & Yaolong Zhao, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Change Analysis and Future Scenario of LULC Using the CA-ANN Approach: A Case Study of the Greater Bay Area, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    6. Eshetu Yirsaw & Wei Wu & Xiaoping Shi & Habtamu Temesgen & Belew Bekele, 2017. "Land Use/Land Cover Change Modeling and the Prediction of Subsequent Changes in Ecosystem Service Values in a Coastal Area of China, the Su-Xi-Chang Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Helen Briassoulis, 2000. "Analysis of Land Use Change: Theoretical and Modeling Approaches," Wholbk, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University, number 17, Fall.
    8. Cláudia M. Viana & Jorge Rocha, 2020. "Evaluating Dominant Land Use/Land Cover Changes and Predicting Future Scenario in a Rural Region Using a Memoryless Stochastic Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-28, May.
    9. Yan Liu & Yongjiu Feng, 2016. "Simulating the Impact of Economic and Environmental Strategies on Future Urban Growth Scenarios in Ningbo, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. repec:rri:bkchap:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Gomes, L.C. & Bianchi, F.J.J.A. & Cardoso, I.M. & Schulte, R.P.O. & Arts, B.J.M. & Fernandes Filho, E.I., 2020. "Land use and land cover scenarios: An interdisciplinary approach integrating local conditions and the global shared socioeconomic pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Manfred M. Fischer, 2006. "Spatial Analysis and GeoComputation," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-35730-8, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gustavo Manuel Cruz-Bello & Martín Enrique Romero-Sánchez & José Mauricio Galeana-Pizaña, 2025. "Can regionalization enhance the performance of land-use change models in rapidly urbanizing areas?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 52(5), pages 1215-1230, June.
    2. Dimitrios Chouvardas & Maria Karatassiou & Petros Tsioras & Ioannis Tsividis & Stefanos Palaiochorinos, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Changes (1945–2020) in a Grazed Landscape of Northern Greece, in Relation to Socioeconomic Changes," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-22, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nij Tontisirin & Sutee Anantsuksomsri, 2021. "Economic Development Policies and Land Use Changes in Thailand: From the Eastern Seaboard to the Eastern Economic Corridor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    2. Cláudia M. Viana & Jorge Rocha, 2020. "Evaluating Dominant Land Use/Land Cover Changes and Predicting Future Scenario in a Rural Region Using a Memoryless Stochastic Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-28, May.
    3. Yongjiu Feng & Jiafeng Wang & Xiaohua Tong & Yang Liu & Zhenkun Lei & Chen Gao & Shurui Chen, 2018. "The Effect of Observation Scale on Urban Growth Simulation Using Particle Swarm Optimization-Based CA Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Youjung Kim & Galen Newman & Burak Güneralp, 2020. "A Review of Driving Factors, Scenarios, and Topics in Urban Land Change Models," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Meiyappan, Prasanth & Dalton, Michael & O’Neill, Brian C. & Jain, Atul K., 2014. "Spatial modeling of agricultural land use change at global scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 152-174.
    6. Constantinos A. Balaras & Andreas I. Theodoropoulos & Elena G. Dascalaki, 2023. "Geographic Information Systems for Facilitating Audits of the Urban Built Environment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-26, May.
    7. Yang, Yuanyuan & Bao, Wenkai & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Scenario simulation of land system change in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    9. Law, Elizabeth A. & Macchi, Leandro & Baumann, Matthias & Decarre, Julieta & Gavier-Pizarro, Gregorio & Levers, Christian & Mastrangelo, Matías E. & Murray, Francisco & Müller, Daniel & Piquer-Rodrígu, 2021. "Fading opportunities for mitigating agriculture-environment trade-offs in a south American deforestation hotspot," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 262.
    10. repec:ags:aaea22:343581 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Marcela Prokopová & Luca Salvati & Gianluca Egidi & Ondřej Cudlín & Renata Včeláková & Radek Plch & Pavel Cudlín, 2019. "Envisioning Present and Future Land-Use Change under Varying Ecological Regimes and Their Influence on Landscape Stability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-24, August.
    12. Sri Murniani Angelina Letsoin & David Herak & Fajar Rahmawan & Ratna Chrismiari Purwestri, 2020. "Land Cover Changes from 1990 to 2019 in Papua, Indonesia: Results of the Remote Sensing Imagery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-18, August.
    13. James J Elser & Timothy J Elser & Stephen R Carpenter & William A Brock, 2014. "Regime Shift in Fertilizer Commodities Indicates More Turbulence Ahead for Food Security," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-7, May.
    14. Vogel, Everton & Martinelli, Gabrielli & Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto, 2021. "Environmental and economic performance of paddy field-based crop-livestock systems in Southern Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    15. Abdulai, Issaka & Hoffmann, Munir P. & Jassogne, Laurence & Asare, Richard & Graefe, Sophie & Tao, Hsiao-Hang & Muilerman, Sander & Vaast, Philippe & Van Asten, Piet & Läderach, Peter & Rötter, Reimun, 2020. "Variations in yield gaps of smallholder cocoa systems and the main determining factors along a climate gradient in Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    16. Maysoon A A Osman & Elfatih M Abdel-Rahman & Joshua Orungo Onono & Lydia A Olaka & Muna M Elhag & Marian Adan & Henri E Z Tonnang, 2023. "Mapping, intensities and future prediction of land use/land cover dynamics using google earth engine and CA- artificial neural network model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-28, July.
    17. Heider, Katharina & Quaranta, Emanuele & García Avilés, José María & Rodriguez Lopez, Juan Miguel & Balbo, Andrea L. & Scheffran, Jürgen, 2022. "Reinventing the wheel – The preservation and potential of traditional water wheels in the terraced irrigated landscapes of the Ricote Valley, southeast Spain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    18. Jeong, Hanseok & Kim, Hakkwan & Jang, Taeil & Park, Seungwoo, 2016. "Assessing the effects of indirect wastewater reuse on paddy irrigation in the Osan River watershed in Korea using the SWAT model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 393-402.
    19. Bazyli Czyżewski & Jakub Staniszewski & Joanna Staniszewska & Marta Guth, 2025. "Does Increasing Agricultural Efficiency Contribute to Food Security—Trade‐Offs of Value Addition in Crop Production?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(S1), pages 939-970, November.
    20. Ethan Gordon & Federico Davila & Chris Riedy, 2022. "Transforming landscapes and mindscapes through regenerative agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 809-826, June.
    21. Alou, Nicolas & Schaub, Sergei & Suter, Matthias & Lüscher, Andreas & Finger, Robert, 2026. "Plant diversity to cope with increased drought risk in grasslands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4038-:d:782241. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.