ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2017-09-17
    Description: Land cover maps increasingly underlie research into socioeconomic and environmental patterns and processes, including global change. It is known that map errors impact our understanding of these phenomena, but quantifying these impacts is difficult because many areas lack adequate reference data. We used a highly accurate, high-resolution map of South African cropland to assess 1) the magnitude of error in several current generation land cover maps, and 2) how these errors propagate in downstream studies. We first quantified pixel-wise errors in the cropland classes of four widely used land cover maps at resolutions ranging from 1 to 100 km, then calculated errors in several representative “downstream” (map-based) analyses, including assessments of vegetative carbon stocks, evapotranspiration, crop production, and household food security. We also evaluated maps’ spatial accuracy based on how precisely they could be used to locate specific landscape features. We found that cropland maps can have substantial biases and poor accuracy at all resolutions (e.g. at 1 km resolution, up to ∼ 45% underestimates of cropland (bias) and nearly 50% mean absolute error (MAE, describing accuracy); at 100 km, up to 15% underestimates and nearly 20% MAE). National-scale maps derived from higher resolution imagery were most accurate, followed by multi-map fusion products. Constraining mapped values to match survey statistics may be effective at minimizing bias (provided the statistics are accurate). Errors in downstream analyses could be substantially amplified or muted, depending on the values ascribed to cropland-adjacent covers (e.g. with forest as adjacent cover, carbon map error was 200-500% greater than in input cropland maps, but ∼ 40% less for sparse cover types). The average locational error was 6 km (600%). These findings provide deeper insight into the causes and potential consequences of land cover map error, and suggest several recommendations for land cover map users. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Print ISSN: 1354-1013
    Electronic ISSN: 1365-2486
    Topics: Biology , Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Geography
    Published by Wiley
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...