IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i4p1394-d1586709.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building a Methodological Reference Framework for Quantifying Tropical Deforestation with Remote Sensing

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Isabel Fernández-Montes de Oca

    (Departamento de Zoología, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México 04510, Mexico
    Fondo Mexicano para la Conservación de la Naturaleza A.C., Ciudad de México 03900, Mexico
    Centro de Investigación en Ciencias de Información Geoespacial, Ciudad de México 14240, Mexico)

  • Adrián Ghilardi

    (Centro de Investigaciones en Geografia Ambiental, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Morelia 58190, Mexico)

  • Edith Kauffer

    (Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (CIESAS)-Sureste, San Cristobal de las Casa 29247, Mexico)

  • Jean Francois Mas

    (Centro de Investigaciones en Geografia Ambiental, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Morelia 58190, Mexico)

  • Víctor Sánchez-Cordero

    (Departamento de Zoología, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México 04510, Mexico)

  • José Alberto Gallardo-Cruz

    (Centro Transdisciplinar Universitario para la Sustentabilidad, Universidad Iberoamericana, Ciudad de México 01219, Mexico)

Abstract

Deforestation is a major threat to the sustainability of natural resources. Thus, adequate estimates of deforestation are crucial for evaluating how sustainable programs are implemented. Still, there is controversy in estimating deforestation, as different estimates often produce contrasting or even conflicting results. It is known that variation in estimates depends on a wide diversity of variables that modify the methods for measuring deforestation, such as scale, types and complexity of vegetation, the definition used, and available inputs of information. This study developed a methodological tool to select the most suitable remote sensing method to measure deforestation in tropical forests. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed publications quantifying deforestation with remote sensing and field data. The information was analyzed and synthesized to build a methodological framework of reference. The methodological and descriptive information of the selected publications served to construct four decision rules (excluding factors, classifier options, elements for choosing a classification, and additional information) for selecting a method for quantifying deforestation. We tested the functionality of this methodological framework of reference by quantifying the deforestation of tropical rainforests in southern Mexico. Based on the decision rules of the framework, two deforestation quantification classifiers were used in the study area (Maximum likelihood and spectral angle mapper (SAM)). We observed that Maximum likelihood had higher values of accuracy than SAM, although both values of accuracy were acceptable. This framework facilitates the selection of remote sensing methods for measuring deforestation by considering the characteristics of each study area and the available inputs. The use of this framework reduced the uncertainty in the estimates of deforestation by controlling a greater number of variables and provided a robust approach for adequately implementing sustainable programs in these threatened rainforests.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Isabel Fernández-Montes de Oca & Adrián Ghilardi & Edith Kauffer & Jean Francois Mas & Víctor Sánchez-Cordero & José Alberto Gallardo-Cruz, 2025. "Building a Methodological Reference Framework for Quantifying Tropical Deforestation with Remote Sensing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1394-:d:1586709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1394/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1394/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stibniati Atmadja & Louis Verchot, 2012. "A review of the state of research, policies and strategies in addressing leakage from reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 311-336, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kuralbayeva, Karlygash, 2021. "Forest carbon offsets over a smart ledger," SocArXiv hxtkg, Center for Open Science.
    2. Bård Harstad & Torben K. Mideksa, 2017. "Conservation Contracts and Political Regimes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(4), pages 1708-1734.
    3. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    4. Pan, Wenqi & Kim, Man-Keun & Ning, Zhuo & Yang, Hongqiang, 2020. "Carbon leakage in energy/forest sectors and climate policy implications using meta-analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Leijten, Floris & Sim, Sarah & King, Henry & Verburg, Peter H., 2021. "Local deforestation spillovers induced by forest moratoria: Evidence from Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    6. Yvonne Hargita & Lukas Giessen & Sven Günter, 2020. "Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, January.
    7. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    8. Dirk-Jan Koch & Marloes Verholt, 2020. "Limits to learning: the struggle to adapt to unintended effects of international payment for environmental services programmes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 507-539, September.
    9. Belachew Gizachew & Svein Solberg & Stefano Puliti, 2018. "Forest Carbon Gain and Loss in Protected Areas of Uganda: Implications to Carbon Benefits of Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-14, November.
    10. le Polain de Waroux, Yann & Garrett, Rachael D. & Graesser, Jordan & Nolte, Christoph & White, Christopher & Lambin, Eric F., 2019. "The Restructuring of South American Soy and Beef Production and Trade Under Changing Environmental Regulations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 188-202.
    11. Robin Matthews & Meine Noordwijk & Eric Lambin & Patrick Meyfroidt & Joyeeta Gupta & Louis Verchot & Kristell Hergoualc’h & Edzo Veldkamp, 2014. "Implementing REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation): evidence on governance, evaluation and impacts from the REDD-ALERT project," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 907-925, August.
    12. Mucahid Mustafa Bayrak & Lawal Mohammed Marafa, 2016. "Ten Years of REDD+: A Critical Review of the Impact of REDD+ on Forest-Dependent Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    13. Dirk-Jan Koch & Jolynde Vis & Maria van der Harst & Elric Tendron & Joost de Laat, 2021. "Assessing International Development Cooperation: Becoming Intentional about Unintended Effects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-26, October.
    14. Dirk-Jan Koch & Marloes Verholt, 0. "Limits to learning: the struggle to adapt to unintended effects of international payment for environmental services programmes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-33.

    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:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1394-:d:1586709. 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.